|
Post by Glenn on Sept 28, 2015 8:22:23 GMT -6
I saw a post over on CT, and thought it was interesting about the trend toward pigment in Hereford cattle.
I think there is an easier answer to this than most think about. The original breed back in England had both white faces and brockle faces. The brockle faced cattle lost the popularity contest. After importation, any face markings here were discriminated against in both breed standards and show ring standards. Only in the last 20 years or so have some began to see facial pigmentation (primarily around the eyes) as a positive trait. Being in the infancy of selecting for this trait I think we will see more and more and more what many consider "non-traditional" face markings. I believe John Alexander said that Miles City had bred a solid red 15/16ths Hereford.
That being said, it can ALSO be a sign of breed impurity. A bell goes off in my head when I see 4 white stockings and big eye patches.
(and big ears.....LOL.....)
|
|
|
Post by jayh on Sept 28, 2015 8:59:15 GMT -6
I will be honest I like the more solid red marked. I still want the white face.
|
|
|
Post by timbernt on Sept 28, 2015 11:49:06 GMT -6
I believe the AHA made a good step toward preventing outside influence when it began to require DNA testing of young sires. The next step to prevent animals like Jay pictured is to require all sires to test at least 15/16 Hereford genes. That would at least put us at the same level as the continental breeds require to register their appendix cattle as purebreds.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Sept 28, 2015 12:02:22 GMT -6
I agree Tim. Initially I was against it as just another fee to pay but I can admit when I am wrong and was wrong. It is good and was needed. I'd like to see some sort of "confirmation" test on some animals too, but the reality is the system just isn't built for it. But being able to verify parentage is a good thing going forward.
|
|
|
Post by tartancowgirl on Sept 28, 2015 12:35:29 GMT -6
About half of our Traditional cattle have pigmented eye rims, not patches but about a quarter to half an inch wide on the upper and lower lids, so as you say it's likely that this trait has always been present in the Hereford. One cow has almost no white on her front legs but others have a lot of white. However they all without exception have a white crest on the neck. Some of the UK polled ones at the shows have no white on the neck at all.
|
|
|
Post by hoekland on Sept 28, 2015 12:42:58 GMT -6
I believe the AHA made a good step toward preventing outside influence when it began to require DNA testing of young sires. The next step to prevent animals like Jay pictured is to require all sires to test at least 15/16 Hereford genes. That would at least put us at the same level as the continental breeds require to register their appendix cattle as purebreds. I agree that DNA testing is a good and neccesary step forward. I disagree on the 14/16s. We have a closed herdbook since 1896. Nothing less than 100% pure is what we should demand
|
|
|
Post by jayh on Sept 28, 2015 13:09:08 GMT -6
I believe the AHA made a good step toward preventing outside influence when it began to require DNA testing of young sires. The next step to prevent animals like Jay pictured is to require all sires to test at least 15/16 Hereford genes. That would at least put us at the same level as the continental breeds require to register their appendix cattle as purebreds. I know he is questionable because of parentage but I thought I have seen a whole herd somewhere that looked very similar to him . If you breed for it I believe it can be done.
|
|
|
Post by larso on Sept 28, 2015 14:47:47 GMT -6
I agree DNA testing has certainly given breeders the assurance of parenthood that was sometimes doubtful but I also think some very good bulls were disregarded here in AUS purely on cosmetics and this mindset has held the breed back.
|
|
|
Post by George on Sept 28, 2015 14:54:12 GMT -6
I still like seeing the strip of white on the crest...as long as it doesn't go back too far! Also, white legs don't bother me much.
|
|
|
Post by bookcliff on Sept 28, 2015 15:14:31 GMT -6
white flashes on the feet are not a sign of impurity. when I was a kid just about everybody in our neck of the woods considered this proper hereford markings along with a feather on the neck.
how Herefords were or are marked ebbs and flows with the times....meller yeller vs. dark red, no feather vs rednecked. red to the ground vs flashes on the feet, pigment on nuts and eyes verses none. all had their reasons for selection and all have changed over the years.
I can remember a time with a rednecked bull had to be pretty damn good or he got cut, so did red bulls in general and damn few Herefords had pigment back then.
that all being said, I agree with comments about the bull pictured.
|
|
|
Post by George on Sept 28, 2015 15:22:32 GMT -6
But being able to verify parentage is a good thing going forward. If they could get the DNA test for parentage down to 1/2 or 1/3 of the current cost - or less- I'd advocate it becoming a requirement for registration. I know that would make a lot of folks mad...but we sure wouldn't be having the problems that we have seen in the past.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Sept 28, 2015 16:57:39 GMT -6
white flashes on the feet are not a sign of impurity. . I know. I was just saying that white leg PLUS goggle eyes makes me think Fleck influence. It's hard to put pigment just on the eyes and not short mark them elsewhere. Like these: Personally, I would like to have 100% around the eyes but not the goggles and a feather right to the shoulder blades but no further back and red legs.
|
|
|
Post by erherf on Sept 28, 2015 19:27:25 GMT -6
Used a bull directly from the Miles City station, a past herd bull there, that was red necked, yellow colored and was white on both back legs up to the hocks. The markings on his progeny have been all over but still get the white up to the hocks every once in a while even on some that have goggle eyes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2015 20:12:08 GMT -6
But being able to verify parentage is a good thing going forward. If they could get the DNA test for parentage down to 1/2 or 1/3 of the current cost - or less- I'd advocate it becoming a requirement for registration. I know that would make a lot of folks mad...but we sure wouldn't be having the problems that we have seen in the past. I know you were pretty passionate regarding DNA testing for all show cattle so let's pose the question why not require DNA testing for all registered animals (bulls or females) sold for profit from a registered breeder too? If we're going to be critical of the show cattle being pure we should have the same if not tougher standards for cattle going to work in registered herds too right? I get that the cost factor is a hinderance on smaller breeders but let's just take some of these large production sales we see average anywhere from 5k to over 15k what is $50 a head at that point to have testing done prior to the sale? Maybe make it a requirement that in order to transfer a registration to another registered breeder that animal must be DNA tested to complete the transaction. At least that way if an animal leaves a program it's now been tested for any defects, impurities, and parentage.
I guess it's one thing for those of us here weighing in on this topic to to feel confident in the cattle we are breeding that a DNA test wouldn't scare anyone and would look at it as a waste of money to some but if we're going to be sticklers on defects and purities we need to be able back the product we are raising and selling right? Right now we only get DNA tests done on bulls we keep for in herd use or sold to another registered breeder or if a buyer requests a test done but I doubt we would flinch if AHA expanded the requirements more considering we already submit all the data needed to be a TPR herd. Right now I think the biggest thing holding back requiring more DNA testing is that if you have had DNA testing done recently you know that it is not exactly a quick process because it sounds like AHA has had issues with the labs they use having the capacity to be able to process all the samples they receive in a timely manner or at least that is what we have been told when we inquired on the status of our DNA tests.
The last full DNA test we did on a bull we sent it in on 11/19/14, the lab did not process it until 12/15 and the horn test was not done until 1/20 so that was a 2 month turn around on a full DNA test so you can imagine what might happen if they number of tests all the sudden increased significantly. Maybe they ironed out the lab issues since then hopefully but that is why I am a little hesitant with the idea of just flipping the switch on DNA testing everything based off what we went through because its not an instant thing to get results for like getting a registration has become.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Sept 28, 2015 20:37:20 GMT -6
At least that way if an animal leaves a program it's now been tested for any defects, impurities, and parentage. These DNA tests at this point DO NOT test for 'impurities'. They test for Parentage Verification (verify the sire and dam) IF REQUESTED and IF the parents have a DNA profile on file at the AHA. They also test for the three defects, and if request and paid extra they generate "enhanced EPDS". That's it.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Sept 28, 2015 20:40:23 GMT -6
The only VERIFICATION is that the sire listed is correct (if the said sire himself has DNA on file) and that the dam is correct (if said dam has DNA on file).
That's it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2015 20:58:43 GMT -6
At least that way if an animal leaves a program it's now been tested for any defects, impurities, and parentage. These DNA tests at this point DO NOT test for 'impurities'. They test for Parentage Verification (verify the sire and dam) IF REQUESTED and IF the parents have a DNA profile on file at the AHA. They also test for the three defects, and if request and paid extra they generate "enhanced EPDS". That's it. The problem with testing for impurities is the shear lack of DNA to test it against so what else could you test against if all you have is parentage? It's damn near impossible to collect DNA on animals that have been dead for decades
|
|
hxh
Weanling
Posts: 128
|
Post by hxh on Sept 30, 2015 8:57:17 GMT -6
Didn't the test on Titan show there were markers not consistent with Hereford blood
|
|
|
Post by hoekland on Sept 30, 2015 9:08:31 GMT -6
Yes, that is correct, but it was done with blood typing and not DNA and the accuracy was questionable enough to avoid court cases as far as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Sept 30, 2015 9:20:03 GMT -6
Correct on Titan, and DNA has the ability to test for conformity to breed characteristics or non-conformity, but the DNA tests that we do now through the AHA do NOT include this. The tests we have now are simply testing for the three defects, confirming parentage to specific animals, and if paid for to compare a profile of markers to "high accuracy" EPD animals to give enhance EPDS.
It would be interesting for some THIRD PARTY to do a test today on Titan, but politics probably preclude that from happening.
Breed purity is simply a can of worms the association does not want to open.
But going forward with the new requirement of DNA profiles on walking and AI sires should keep us more on the straight and narrow. Any breed impurities up to this point are treated as "water under the bridge".
|
|
|
Post by avignon on Oct 1, 2015 15:44:12 GMT -6
As an Australian breeder pigment, colour & red necks are of great interest/frustration to me. While I personally prefer red eyed, dark coloured cattle I do think that there is too much emphasis placed on these traits at times to the detriment of breed progression. I can appreciate the importance of pigment & personally would like not use a white eyed bull (given my market) i think attention to coat colour & red necks is well and truely overdone. A number of my best Bulls have been red necked & have sold at a large discount comparative to quality - unfortunately red necks are prominent in line 1 cattle therefore limiting the appreciation & positive impact that these cattle could have on Australian Herefords broadly (which are traditionally high birthweight).
Interestingly I am now noticing more attention paid to hair/skin softness so I am waiting to see whether that attention reduces the scrutiny on coat colour.
|
|
|
Post by elkwc on Oct 1, 2015 21:00:08 GMT -6
I've watched this thread with interest. We each use our own criteria for marking and also for determing in an animal is pure or not. Some don't care as long as they can help their program and are registered. I've read many posts on here about purity and had the opportunity to visit with several who were either breeders or involved with Herefords during the late 70's through the 90's. Some opinions are based on hear say and others are from a person with more indept knowledge. What I've heard overall backs my initial thoughts about some bloodlines. Many of the cattle with the coon eyes, dark color and non traditional Hereford markings go back to bloodlines I've been told recently that wasn't pure. The sad deal is if you eliminate each of them you narrow the field down to a few choices if a person prefers polled cattle. There were horned lines also that were impure. But on the horned side a person does have more choices and a wider selection. I would never use the bull pictured above. Again my personal decision. I recently saw a nice dark red bull with no white on his neck. Again I can't get past the markings so likely would never use him. My feeling is if I'm going to use a non traditional marked Hereford I had just as well buy a cross or a Hereford influenced animal. Like mentioned above the current DNA tests really doesn't prove purity. And from what I've been told in the last year the AHA knew of several impure bulls like Titan but due to who owned them chose to just let it slide unless an issue arose like the one with Titan. I feel the Angus association has their share of impure blood also. But two wrongs don't make a right. I'm a Herford traditionalist so if I'm going to buy one I want one that fits my idea of what one should be built and marked like. I have found a few Hereford heifers I'm going to look at. I've seen their mothers and they are marked like a traditional Herford. Too me the dark solid red marked cattle set off a bell like one with too much white does to others.
|
|
|
Post by mrvictordomino on Oct 2, 2015 3:26:49 GMT -6
I too have been following this thread. I personally do not like the large coon eyed cattle like the one Jay used for an example. I will tell you that you can change the markings of your herd if you select for it. The foundation for my line of cattle were notorious for white mainly due to the selection criteria which did not place an emphasis on markings, only total performance. I battled this for years and started selecting away from any extra white. Over time the result has been a certain percentage of cattle with little and some with no white on their necks. It has taken forty years to get to this point. Here, a higher percentage of customers prefer the bulls marked very conservatively, I have had some buying sight unseen that demand the traditional feather neck bulls but it is rare. I have eased up on the marking deal and have more traditionally marked cattle. I cannot stand white over the loin and out of two hundred females (cows & heifers) there are only two with any extra white and one of them was born this year.. She will be staying, too good to part with.
|
|
|
Post by jayh on Oct 2, 2015 14:09:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Oct 2, 2015 14:36:30 GMT -6
I should just take your bait here and between the two of us, we'll have Ace sending me an email wanting back on here........
lmao
|
|