South african feedlot association march 12 2009
Download
1 / 77

South African Feedlot Association March 12, 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 145 Views
  • Uploaded on

South African Feedlot Association March 12, 2009. Practical Application of Gene Markers and Feed Efficiency Data for Today’s Cattleman. By Dr. Roger E. Hunsley. GENETIC MARKERS. Genetic Markers are available for the following traits: Marbling: QG1, QG2, QG3, QG4

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' South African Feedlot Association March 12, 2009' - isra


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
South african feedlot association march 12 2009

South African Feedlot Association March 12, 2009

Practical Application of Gene Markers and Feed Efficiency Data for Today’s Cattleman

By Dr. Roger E. Hunsley


Genetic markers
GENETIC MARKERS

Genetic Markers are available for the following traits:

  • Marbling: QG1, QG2, QG3, QG4

  • Tenderness: T1, T2, T3, T4

  • Feed Efficiency: FE1, FE2, FE3, FE4

  • Muscling (F94L)


Genetic markers1
GENETIC MARKERS

Select a genomics company to test and verify your samples. Make certain that all procedures and genetic tests are committed to an extensive 3rd party verification before the tests are made available commercially.


Table 1
Table 1

Carries two copies of the favorable

form of the GeneSTAR marbling gene

Carries one copy of the favorable

form of the GeneSTAR marbling gene

Carries zero copies of the favorable

form of the GeneSTAR marbling gene


Table 2 Average Outcomes When Mating Different Combinations of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

* This mating design illustrates Mendelian heredity and the probability of results from mating a 0, 1 or 2 STAR Sire and Dam.


Marbling
MARBLING of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • Marbling is the number one price determiner of all cattle harvested in the U.S. and around the world.

  • The ultimate value and final price of a beef carcass is based more significantly on marbling than any other trait.


Table 2 usda marbling score and quality grade score
Table 2. USDA Marbling Score and Quality Grade Score. of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

Quality Grade Amt. of Marbling Numerical Score

Prime+ Abundant 10.0-10.9

Primeº Moderately abundant 9.0-9.9

Prime- Slightly abundant 8.0-8.9

Choice+ Moderate 7.0-7.9

Choiceº Modest 6.0-6.9

Choice- Small 5.0-5.9

Select Slight 4.0-4.9

Standard+ Traces 3.0-3.9

Standard- Practically devoid 2.0-2.9

Utility Devoid 1.0-1.9


Marbling1
MARBLING* of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • Seventy-four 2003 – 2004 born steers that were basically unselected for DNA marbling markers were feedlotted and harvested.

  • 9% had USDA Choice marbling scores.

    * Purebred Brahman steers


Marbling2
MARBLING* of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • Ninety-eight 2005 – 2006 born steers that were the result of intense selection for QG1 and QG2 DNA marbling markers were feedlotted and harvested.

  • 30% had USDA Choice marbling scores.

    * Purebred Brahman steers


Tenderness
TENDERNESS of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • Consumer eating satisfaction is based mostly on the tenderness qualities of the product.

  • Consumers are willing to pay a premium for guaranteed tender steaks or other beef products.

  • Tender beef leads to more satisfactory eating experiences than any other trait.


Warner bratzler wb
Warner Bratzler = WB of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • Warner Bratzler (WB) is a mechanical Shear instrument that measures the force required to mechanically cut through a core of cooked steak.


Tenderness1
Tenderness * of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • Ninety-eight 2005 – 2006 born steers that were the result of intense selection for T1, T2 and T3 DNA tenderness markers were feedlotted and harvested.

  • 92% had Warner-Braztler (WB) shear values in the 3.00 – 8.99 lb. range.

    * Purebred Brahman steers


Tenderness2
Tenderness of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

  • The leading meat scientists consider any beef sample that requires over 11 lbs. of WB shear force to be unacceptable for tenderness.


Shear values for unselected and selected genestar values
Shear Values for Unselected and Selected GeneSTAR Values of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings

¹ 4 Carcasses in the 2003-2004 birth year had shear values over 8.99 lbs.

² 1 Carcass in the 2004-2005 birth year had a shear value over 8.99 lbs.

³ None of the 2005-2006 birth year group had shear values over 8.99 lbs.


Effect of usda quality grade on tenderness
Effect of USDA Quality Grade of Parents with Particular GeneSTAR Ratings on Tenderness

  • Recent Studies have documented that 10-15% of USDA Choice carcasses had unacceptable tenderness scores.

  • 25-35% of the USDA Select carcasses had unacceptable tenderness scores.

  • The result of the study indicates there is room for improvement of tenderness within all USDA Quality grades.

  • The value of having information about meat quality early in the animal’s life, rather than post-harvest, is priceless.


Results of vassberg brahman test from bovigen august 24 2007
Results of Vassberg Brahman Test from BOVIGEN, August 24, 2007

156 Head Tested:

8 head were homozygous for QG1 and QG2

8 head had 5 STARs out of 6 possible STARs for tenderness

35% were 6 STARs or higher with the following breakdown:

6 STARs 40 head

7 STARs 10 head

8 STARs 3 head

9 STARs 1 head


Average marbling score by star
Average Marbling Score 2007by STAR

There were no 8 STAR animals. Source: Bovigen, LLC


Dna markers for feed efficiency
DNA MARKERS FOR 2007FEED EFFICIENCY

  • The 4 DNA markers for feed efficiency (NFI) have no genetic association to marbling, average daily gain, carcass weight and rump fat (P8).


Results of vassberg brahman test report from bovigen august 24 2007
Results of Vassberg Brahman Test Report from BOVIGEN 2007August 24, 2007

156 Head Tested:

In the Feed Efficiency (NFI) analysis, 82% of the animals had all 8 of the markers resulting in the following breakdown:

6 STARs 1 Head

7 STARs 26 Head

8 STARs 129 Head


Feed efficiency
FEED EFFICIENCY 2007

  • Pasture and feed costs account for nearly 70% of the total cost of producing beef.

  • Research has shown that NFI selection can reduce grass and feed intake by 15-20% while still maintaining the same production levels.

  • Today, this accounts for $150 to $250 savings in producing a beef animal.


Net feed intake nfi
NET FEED INTAKE (NFI) 2007

  • Net Feed Intake (NFI) is equal to actual feed intake less feed intake for growth and metabolic (maintenance) requirements.

  • The heritability estimate for NFI is 0.40.


Net feed intake nfi1
NET FEED INTAKE (NFI) 2007

  • Efficient animals eat less than expected and have a negative or low NFI.

  • Inefficient animals eat more than expected and have a positive or high NFI.




Net feed intake nfi2
NET FEED INTAKE (NFI) 2007

  • Research has shown that selecting for NFI post-weaning and at maturity has a very high correlation of 0.90 to genetic improvement for efficiency in the cow herd through the daughters retained out of tested bulls.


The effect of stars on nfi and adg involved 1 060 steers heifers in finishing phase
The Effect of STARs on NFI and ADG 2007(Involved 1,060 steers & heifers in finishing phase)


Feed efficiency1
Feed Efficiency 2007

  • Numerous studies have shown that low NFI animals consume an average of 3.3 to 5.5 lbs. less feed per day than high NFI animals with similar growth and carcass characteristics.


Nfi as a selection tool
NFI as a Selection Tool 2007

  • NFI is the best selection tool for genetic improvement for Feed Efficiency at the bull breeding level.


Selected data from nfi brahman bull test kallion farms
Selected Data* from NFI Brahman Bull Test (Kallion Farms) 2007

*Bulls with the highest and lowest feed to gain ratio in the test group of 64 bulls at the end of the 70 day test period


Selected data from nfi brahman bull test kallion farms1
Selected Data* from NFI Brahman Bull Test (Kallion Farms) 2007

*The five lowest (most desirable) NFI bulls at the end of the 70 day test period


Selected data from nfi brahman bull test kallion farms2
Selected Data* from NFI Brahman Bull Test (Kallion Farms) 2007

*The five highest (least desirable) NFI bulls at the end of the 70 day test period


Selected data from nfi brahman bull test kallion farms3
Selected Data* from NFI Brahman Bull Test (Kallion Farms) 2007

*Two bulls with the same initial weight on test but two-thirds of a pound difference in ADG, nearly 5 pounds difference in dry matter intake and more than 7 pounds difference in NFI at the end of the 70 day test period


Feed efficiency2
FEED EFFICIENCY 2007

  • Kallion Farms has documented almost a $5,000 difference in the genetic expression for feed efficiency between two purebred Brahman sires.

  • With cattlemen feeling the effects of corn prices that have more than doubled in the past 12 months, feed efficiency has moved to the number one position in our selection program.


Feed efficiency3
Feed Efficiency 2007

  • Selection for low NFI can have a very substantial economic impact on the beef industry.


New kallion growsafe test facility 2008
New Kallion GrowSafe 2007Test Facility - 2008



Feed efficiency4
FEED EFFICIENCY 2007

  • The purchase of a feed efficient bull will make a tremendous difference in your bottom line.


Temperament
TEMPERAMENT 2007

  • Numerous studies have documented that mild temperament cattle returned more dollars in the pasture or the feedlot than aggressive animals.

  • All Kallion Farms animals must pass a strict temperament evaluation to be offered for sale or used for breeding.


Temperament1
TEMPERAMENT 2007

  • Suggest using a chute side score or a chute flight temperament evaluation such as:

    • T1 – Temperament Acceptable

    • T2 – Temperament Questionable

    • T3 – Temperament Bad - Cull


Temperament measures
TEMPERAMENT MEASURES 2007

  • Temperament Scoring System

  • Flight speeds measured at chute exit

  • Physiologic responses – Cortisol levels

  • Revealed eye white percentage using digital camera equipment.

    Range: 10 = good

    60 = bad



Ultrasound
ULTRASOUND 2007

Recent ultrasound results received 11/07/07 from the National CUP Lab & Technology Center on 82 purebred Brahman heifers off test were as follows:

Average weight 789 pounds

  • Average backfat thickness 0.19 inches

  • Average ribeye area 9.7 sq. in.

  • Average ribeye area per cwt 1.23 sq. in.

  • Average intramuscular fat (IMF) 3.32%


Ultrasound1
ULTRASOUND 2007

  • Recently a test group of 38 bulls yielded the following ultrasound results:

    0.19 in. backfat thickness

    10.5 sq. in. ribeye area

    3.17 % intramuscular fat (IMF)

  • One bull had 5.07% IMF and another bull had 4.42% IMF.


Ultrasound2
ULTRASOUND 2007

  • Recently a test group of 147 heifers yielded the following ultrasound results:

    0.14 in. backfat thickness

    7.97 sq. in. ribeye area

    3.37 % intramuscular fat (IMF)

  • Twenty-one of the heifers had 4.0% IMF or higher with one heifer at 5.75% IMF.


Typical imf adjusted to 365 days of age in beef cattle
Typical IMF % Adjusted to 2007365 Days of Age in Beef Cattle

  • IMF% of 2.0-2.99 Acceptable

    (Low Select)

  • IMF% of 3.0-3.99 Highly Acceptable (High Select)

  • IMF% of 4.0-4.99 Rare & Outstanding (Low Choice)

  • IMF% 0f 5.0 or higher Rare

    (Average Choice or higher)


Ultrasound3
ULTRASOUND 2007

  • Twelve percent of the total test group of 185 head had 4.0% IMF or higher which equates to Low Choice or higher marbling scores.


Ultrasound4
ULTRASOUND 2007

Ultrasound results received 02/21/09 from the National CUP Lab and Technology Center on 122 purebred Brahman heifers:

Average Weight 649 pounds

Average Backfat Thickness 0.10 inches

Average Ribeye Area 7.87 sq. in. (51 sq. cm.)

Average Ribeye Area per cwt 1.24 sq. in.

Average Intramuscular Fat (IMF) 3.46%


Ultrasound5
ULTRASOUND 2007

Ultrasound results received 02/21/09 from the National CUP Lab and Technology Center on 122 purebred Brahman heifers:

Twenty-four of the heifers had 4.0% IMF or higher with 3 heifers over 5.0% IMF.

That’s 20% of the entire group with 4.0% or higher IMF ultrasound values.


Ultrasound for fertility
ULTRASOUND FOR FERTILITY 2007

  • Ovary and horn size are measured via ultrasound @ 10-14 months of age on all females. At the same time, the females are ultrasounded for REA, BF and % IMF.


Ultrasound for fertility1
ULTRASOUND FOR FERTILITY 2007

  • 75 heifers between 12 and 22 months of age were ultrasounded for ovary and horn size (tract scores) on November 19, 2008.

  • 40% were rated excellent or mature

    Of these, 80% conceived on first service

    when exposed to natural service

  • 60% were rated poor or immature


Ultrasound for fertility2
ULTRASOUND FOR FERTILITY 2007

  • 39 heifers between 12 and 22 months of age were ultrasounded for ovary and horn size (tract scores) in December of 2008

  • 17 scored excellent or mature (44%)

  • 22 scored poor or immature (56%)

  • 10 of the 22 that scored immature were acceptable for breeding after “ciders” were applied.

  • 12 of the heifers were too late maturing and were culled . . . not used for breeding


Ultrasound for fertility3
ULTRASOUND FOR FERTILITY 2007

  • About 1/3 of each test group were too late maturing to meet the fertility standards at Kallion Farms


Ribeye photos

Ribeye Photos 2007

Purebred Kallion Farms

Brahman Steer Carcasses





Other tools used in conjunction with gene marker technology
Other Tools Used in Conjunction with Gene Marker Technology 2007

  • Warner-Bratzler mechanical shear instrument

  • GrowSafe – RFID automated data acquisition for net feed intake (NFI)

  • Temperament Evaluation

  • Ultrasound Technology

  • Sexed Semen

  • Invitro Fertilization (IVF)



Sexed semen or sexed embryos1
Sexed Semen 2007 or Sexed Embryos

  • Sexed semen will produce 92-94% of the sex selected.

  • Sexed embryos should be 100% accurate for the sex selection.



Invitro fertilization ivf
Invitro Fertilization (IVF) 2007

  • Why invitro fertilization?

    Shortens the generation interval from 5 years to 2-3 years resulting in a quicker turnover of your gene pool.


Invitro fertilization ivf1
Invitro Fertilization (IVF) 2007

  • IVF allows for early embryo production and pregnancies from young females before they would be naturally or artificially bred to calve first at 2, 2 ½ or 3 years of age.

  • Successful invitro fertilization has occurred at 9-12 months of age in females with pregnancies confirmed at 11-13 months of age.


Embryo transfer
EMBRYO TRANSFER 2007

  • Since May 2005, over 4,000 successful embryo transfers have been completed at Kallion Farms.

  • In May 2006, the first IVF transfer that resulted in a pregnancy occurred at Kallion Farms.


Kallion farms summary
Kallion Farms Summary 2007

  • To date, we have documented improvements at Kallion Farms of one full degree of marbling in harvested steer offspring.

  • Kallion has also recorded a 20-25% improvement in tenderness through harvested siblings to the animals used in the breeding program.


Customer producer value for higher marbling scores
Customer-Producer Value 2007for Higher Marbling Scores

  • The price differential between a USDA Choice Grade carcass and a USDA Select Grade carcass is about $12.50/cwt. That’s $100 of added value for an 800 lb. carcass.

  • This is the minimum value differential per harvested feedlot animal.


Customer producer value for improved tenderness scores
Customer-Producer Value 2007for Improved Tenderness Scores

  • The price differential between a guaranteed tender product compared to a product with questionable or unacceptable tenderness scores . . .

    PRICELESS!


Summary the future of beef
Summary: 2007The Future of Beef

  • “If you thought beef – steak in particular – was big last year, brace yourself.”

  • “We will see the unabashed growth in the steak craze”, according to D. Cowin, editor in chief of the Food and Wine magazine.



New technology
New Technology 2007

  • Genomics – used to identify genotypes

  • Phenomics – used to identify phenotypes


How by using beadchip technology
How? By Using BeadChip Technology 2007

  • The Illumina Bovine SNP 50 BeadChip is a glass slide that contains thousands of DNA markers called SNP’s

  • SNP’s are used to find relationships between DNA markers and traits of economic importance!


Beadchip technology
BeadChip Technology 2007

  • A single chip generates about 53,000 genotypes for each of 12 individual animals. DNA samples from each animal are applied to the BeadChip and scanned to produce genotypes.

  • Statistical analysis of genotypes can identify relationships between DNA markers and economically relevant production traits (ERT’s).


Beadchip technology1
BeadChip Technology 2007

Researchers are developing large collections of cattle phenotypes or observable traits for the following:

  • General Immune – System Functionality

  • Body Temperature

  • Respiratory Rate

  • Feeding Behavior

  • Post Weaning Feed Efficiency

  • Life Time Production in Beef Cattle


Beadchip technology2
BeadChip Technology 2007

Scientists have located genetically significant areas called “Quantitative Trait Loci” (QTL’s) that relate to production traits for the following:


Beadchip technology3
BeadChip Technology 2007

1. Beef Quality and fat composition

  • Concentration of monounsaturated fat which is healthier than saturated fat

  • Could lead to marker-assisted selection for fatty acid content of meat from beef cattle breeds

  • Other desired nutritional traits in beef

    2. Tenderness and Palatability

    3. Feed Efficiency

    4. Reproduction Success


Summary
SUMMARY 2007

  • Identification of genetic markers will provide opportunities to improve selection accuracy for traits that are difficult to measure in an industry setting.


ad