DFF
Fresh Calf
Posts: 18
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 14:03:23 GMT -6
Post by DFF on Feb 19, 2012 14:03:23 GMT -6
Whats the scoop on 23D? I was looking @ Heltons pedigree and didnt see it . only went back a couple generations off his papers.
Thanks
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 14:18:30 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 19, 2012 14:18:30 GMT -6
On the GO EXCEL L18 bull, if you go back on his maternal granddam's pedigree, you'll eventually run into the K&B Summit 4064 1ET bull. He'll trace on back to Titan 23D. I've never checked the rest of Helton's pedigree since I already knew he was a L18 grandson. But I really like the looks of the Helton bull. He ought to do those Black Hereford folks a lot of good!
|
|
DFF
Fresh Calf
Posts: 18
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 18:15:27 GMT -6
Post by DFF on Feb 19, 2012 18:15:27 GMT -6
So whats the controversy on Titan 23D?
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 18:31:58 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 19, 2012 18:31:58 GMT -6
simmental-X, sire of 4-7's
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 19:19:33 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 19, 2012 19:19:33 GMT -6
So whats the controversy on Titan 23D? Titan 23D was probably the originator of much of the diluter gene problem in the Hereford breed. S Titan 7777, a Denver Champion bull was a son and was widely used...then later was confirmed to be carrying the diluter gene. Tex Prime Time, another Denver Champion, was also widely used during the frame race, then later confirmed to be carrying both the diluter gene and hypotrichosis gene. Prime Time probably inherited the genes from his sire, DR Awesome 8429, who was a son of Explosion, a confirmed HY carrier and out of a cow who was a daughter of Titan 23D, where the diluter gene likely originated. Because of the presence of the diluter gene and Titan 23D's unHereford- like phenotype, I've come to the conclusion that the bull was actually part Simmental, a belief that is pretty widely held . A picture of Titan 23D:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 19:24:15 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2012 19:24:15 GMT -6
So whats the controversy on Titan 23D? but don't let that get in the way... besides we have a screening test now - so its ok to take full advantage and no one will be the wiser.... and its so much easier!
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 20:06:54 GMT -6
Post by rockmillsfarm on Feb 19, 2012 20:06:54 GMT -6
Here's a partial list of some 23D decendants I copied off somebody, I've not checked them all, but there's plenty more out there.
FELTONS OZZIE 492 {DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42223168) MSU TCF REVOLUTION 4R {CHB,DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42593689) FELTONS LEGEND 242 {SOD,CHB,HYF} (P42016383) KCF BENNETT 774 R413 {CHB} (P42651310) FELTONS OLAF 414 {CHB} (P42223202) KCF BENNETT 9126J P18 {CHB} (P42530680) FELTONS MAGNUM 434 {CHB,DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42228848) SKY CMR TRAFFIC 774 102P ET (P42467353) LAGRAND DOMINO 39P (P42538188) HUTH DOMINO S028 (P42725121) SPARKS 774 6200S {DLF,IEF} (P42737848) KCF BENNETT RED HOUSE S330 {DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42763158) STAR L3 GERBER VISION 053 {DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42811435) DR MRF COMPLETE 774 UR04 ET {DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42905254) MC 774 DOMINO U886 ET {DLF,IEF} (P42923022) R&R 774 NAVIGATOR 009K 8152 ET {DLF,IEF} (P42942167) CMR TF 242 GARRETT 430 (P42563522) BAR JZ LEGENDARY 819T {DLF,IEF} (P42798575) SHF PROGRESS P20 {CHB,DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42481042) MSU TCF SAGINAW 5S {CHB,DLF,IEF} (P42709405) EF F745 FRANK P230 {CHB} (P42528669) LFF CHESTER P230 OF S1 {DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42886583) BOYD WORLDWIDE 9050 ET {DLF,HYF,IEF} (P42982024)
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 20:55:07 GMT -6
Post by mrvictordomino on Feb 19, 2012 20:55:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 21:16:34 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 19, 2012 21:16:34 GMT -6
what you will find if you check the list of bulls that George compiled is most go back to some form of Feltons breeding. Frank told me one time while giong thru his cows when I questioned his use of 4-7's and why he didn't cull them out and I qoute "they are good cattle and if I had to throw away cows instead of breeding away from a problem how would a guy ever get anywhere".. I know he meant that in the context of all problems (ie big BW, no carcass, ect ect ect along with the so called dilutor gene--IE suspect Simmy red Holstien whatever pedigrees what ever that AHA never had the balls to de-register) but it still made me wonder. and yes Ace I have used Feltons Legend 242 but we have already had that discussion. We had a handful of High Summit 166Y's back in the early years at CCR, turned em all into commercial cowswhen one of the neibhors had a flowered simmy bull, got in to the North #1 pasture (all our pastures had #'s instead of names-easier for the office staff in KC to keep straight since we had 34 summer pastures), bred a few and 2 of the calves were indistingishable from his flowered calves across the fence the next spring. Another bull I thought was not pure that I personally used AI when I was young and really dumb was BP Master Plan. To this day you can't convince me he was straight Hereford. I also bought some cows from the Blue Jacket dispersal back in '94. I didn't check teh peidgrees back behind 3 generations (no online pedigrees back then), weren't worth the money I paid for em, turned the ones who didn't prolapse of get cancer eye in commercials and bred em to a Angus bull. boom-damn near totally black or grey baldies--had AHA send me a 6 generation pedigree on the ones that did that and BOOM either 23D or 7777 in the 4th generation.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 21:28:04 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 19, 2012 21:28:04 GMT -6
what you will find if you check the list of bulls that George compiled is most go back to some form of Feltons breeding. Frank told me one time while giong thru his cows when I questioned his use of 4-7's and why he didn't cull them out and I qoute "they are good cattle and if I had to throw away cows instead of breeding away from a problem how would a guy ever get anywhere".. I know he meant that in the context of all problems (ie big BW, no carcass, ect ect ect along with the so called dilutor gene--IE suspect Simmy red Holstien whatever pedigrees what ever that AHA never had the balls to de-register) but it still made me wonder. and yes Ace I have used Feltons Legend 242 but we have already had that discussion. Tom, when I did my research into the Felton-7777 use, it appears that Felton dodged the diluter carrying gene entirely in those cattle that he kept and used. That was fortunate - and no doubt a significant reason that those cattle have since become so widely used. Had the diluter gene come along with them, it would have been a different story entirely.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 21:33:02 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 19, 2012 21:33:02 GMT -6
The other bull that I personally used AI when I was young and really dumb was BP Master Plan. To this day you can't convince me he was straight Hereford. Care to expand on what you experienced that makes you think that?
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 21:44:52 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 19, 2012 21:44:52 GMT -6
I agree with Frank dodging the bullet. as far as Master Plan..... big fuzzy ears, those long simmy jug type heads, the first bull crop of master plans had the the smaller type simmy horn at yearling (was on the cowboy crew at KSU when I was in college and they had registered simmy cows at purebred and Doc Kirchoff's 100 head genetic research cows were pure simmy too so I saw alot of them) and that long lanky phenotype more like the typical simmy cow in this part of the country at the particular time instead of the typical Hereford. they also had a darker red like what you used to see on the red simmy bulls in the 90's and early 2000's instead of the usual shades of red Herefords have and their hair seemed a slick coarse type like simmys sometimes have.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 21:55:26 GMT -6
Post by mrvictordomino on Feb 19, 2012 21:55:26 GMT -6
what you will find if you check the list of bulls that George compiled is most go back to some form of Feltons breeding. Frank told me one time while giong thru his cows when I questioned his use of 4-7's and why he didn't cull them out and I qoute "they are good cattle and if I had to throw away cows instead of breeding away from a problem how would a guy ever get anywhere".. I know he meant that in the context of all problems (ie big BW, no carcass, ect ect ect along with the so called dilutor gene--IE suspect Simmy red Holstien whatever pedigrees what ever that AHA never had the balls to de-register) but it still made me wonder. and yes Ace I have used Feltons Legend 242 but we have already had that discussion. Tom, when I did my research into the Felton-7777 use, it appears that Felton dodged the diluter carrying gene entirely in those cattle that he kept and used. That was fortunate - and no doubt a significant reason that those cattle have since become so widely used. Had the diluter gene come along with them, it would have been a different story entirely. How do you dodge the diluter gene??
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 22:06:08 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 19, 2012 22:06:08 GMT -6
shitcanned the Masterplans and never kept a heifer out of em. haven't ever used a horned bull that had 23d or 4-7's in the pedigree, make the gage cows and thier desendents commerical s with no heifers kept back. the only thing I have on the place that goes back to a dilutor anywhere are my Legends and I explained all that back this summer on a previous tread. but if you insist I will drag that back up to this thread so we can have that arguement all over again. might give Ace a kick.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 22:11:56 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 19, 2012 22:11:56 GMT -6
Tom, when I did my research into the Felton-7777 use, it appears that Felton dodged the diluter carrying gene entirely in those cattle that he kept and used. That was fortunate - and no doubt a significant reason that those cattle have since become so widely used. Had the diluter gene come along with them, it would have been a different story entirely. How do you dodge the diluter gene?? There is a 50-50 chance of 7777 passing it along to any progeny. So, if you had 10 7777 calves, the odds would be that about half of them would carry the diluter gene. Since I could never find a confirmed diluter carrier where the gene could be solely traced back to the Felton herd and the 7777 link, I'm betting that Frank Felton beat the odds - at least in the cattle that he kept for breeding purposes. If I recall correctly, there was some 7777 descendants that were never used for breeding and never had a recorded calf. I did that research at the time that LFF came on the boards and announced that 774 had been tested as diluter free, so it's been a while back. But I clearly remember looking at the information and thinking about how lucky Frank Felton was! Edited to add: It was August of 2010. Here's the link to that thread if anyone wants to review it: www.cattletoday.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=66171&hilit=feltons+774
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
23D ??
Feb 19, 2012 22:57:49 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2012 22:57:49 GMT -6
the big reason i get a kick out of all this is... the same guys that used 23D as a reason to destroy the breeders that used the cattle (and i'd say the majority did not knowingly) are now the ones that are taking advantage of it. we got rid of it because everyone tore you a new one for having it and its like they somehow forgot and seems like to me there are just as many that don't even have a clue. i also personally helped with finding the dna to establish the dna test for the gene all the while under the impression it was going to be used for the exact opposite of what it is used for now. i guess it should have been obvious that the association would take any other "legal" stance on the matter but it still rubs me wrong - especially when you basically cull 80% of a herd that goes back to the early 40's that never once even with 23D blood carried the gene. looking back i should have bred them polled and i'd be right in the thick of it.
something else i've always thought about... there are alot of cattle i absolutely love that go back to 23D or another dilutor. there is a bull back to another dilutor that as far as beef animals go i think is as good as they get. i AI'd to L18 also not knowing and those were auwfully good cattle - ironically enough, the year after i culled all the 23D blood from the herd. i don't have the experience with the felton cattle but i can see why they are popular. beaver gave me some good advice when this was all going on - make a choice... either purist or utilize it and move on. anymore, the more i think about it i would guess there are a lot more cattle that are the same situation throught history that never came to light.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 20, 2012 0:25:01 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 20, 2012 0:25:01 GMT -6
the big reason i get a kick out of all this is... the same guys that used 23D as a reason to destroy the breeders that used the cattle (and i'd say the majority did not knowingly) are now the ones that are taking advantage of it. we got rid of it because everyone tore you a new one for having it and its like they somehow forgot and seems like to me there are just as many that don't even have a clue. i also personally helped with finding the dna to establish the dna test for the gene all the while under the impression it was going to be used for the exact opposite of what it is used for now. i guess it should have been obvious that the association would take any other "legal" stance on the matter but it still rubs me wrong - especially when you basically cull 80% of a herd that goes back to the early 40's that never once even with 23D blood carried the gene. looking back i should have bred them polled and i'd be right in the thick of it. something else i've always thought about... there are alot of cattle i absolutely love that go back to 23D or another dilutor. there is a bull back to another dilutor that as far as beef animals go i think is as good as they get. i AI'd to L18 also not knowing and those were auwfully good cattle - ironically enough, the year after i culled all the 23D blood from the herd. i don't have the experience with the felton cattle but i can see why they are popular. beaver gave me some good advice when this was all going on - make a choice... either purist or utilize it and move on. anymore, the more i think about it i would guess there are a lot more cattle that are the same situation throught history that never came to light. I think anyone that knows much of the story can empathize with your feelings about this, Ace. Some people whom I greatly respect have suggested to me that even discussing this on a public message board is harmful to the breed - and perhaps I shouldn't do it. But it is a part of the breed's history, and unlike the dwarfism saga, there hasn't been any books published that covers it. So people are left with trying to research what happened in the old Hereford Journals and we know that what was published there inadequately tells what really happened. I think folks new to the Hereford breed should be made aware of why some old codger turns up his nose at their prized L18, 774, Progress, or (insert a whole myriad of bulls here) sired cattle. To think that all these "impure" cattle should be purged from the registry is preposterous at this point. Instead, the breed purists need to concentrate on making sure that all the carriers of these genetic disorders are tested and identified. At least with the DNA tests available, that damage can now be minimized. I just wish more breeders would be aware of the potential problems that might be in their herd - and take it on themselves to make sure that they aren't passing it on to someone else - by testing and disclosing those results. It's obvious that there's still a large number of folks that have no clue what the potential problems are - and where they originated. Far too many cattle are being sold in these sales with unresolved potential genetic problems back in their pedigree - with no acknowledgment of that problem existing - or that the animal has been tested for it. That should change! And I'd bet that Herefords are still the "most pure" of the major cattle breeds.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 20, 2012 0:33:31 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 20, 2012 0:33:31 GMT -6
your right about the other breeds. AI'ed some bottom end Hereford cows the Sitz Alliance 6595 one time. when you look at Angus pedigrees he'll show up quite a bit. I got horns on those baldies. Ken Stephens had the same issue with a 6595 son he had too. now I ain't to bright sometimes but from what I remember from Walt Smiths genetics class at K-State polled is dominate and if you breed a Angus bull to a horned Hereford cow those calves SHOULD BE POLLED. go figure. My wife bought some Angus heifers from a big-duck Angus outfit (who used to sell Harris Ranches their Angus bulls) back in 95. they didn't pan out so we just bred them Hereford, got horns on every baldie calf that #333 cow ever had.
interesting sidebar about Walt Smith. served in WW2, came back did his PHD on some of the first Hereford dwarfs in the US. had it nailed down in stone about how it was happening genetically-not where it started with St. Loius Lad but how it occurred genetically, what the %chances were and how to progeny test for it. His PHD committee said he was wrong. he said he was right and wouldn't budge. ran the horse unit at KSU for about 7 years as the whole dwarf thing got figured out by the "Runt Hunter crew". Once KSU saw that Walt had been right in his PHD thesis several years earlier than AHA the Animal Science dept. called Walt in to teach genetics and when they went to award him his PHD he wouldn't take it, never did. went on to teach genetics at KSU for dang near 40 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
23D ??
Feb 20, 2012 15:29:23 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2012 15:29:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 20, 2012 19:01:45 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 20, 2012 19:01:45 GMT -6
John, I've researched that out pretty good, and it's my conclusion that there is a pedigree error back in his pedigree somewhere on his sire's dam's(paternal granddam) side. For instance, if you search back into SR Robin Hood 249's pedigree, you'll see the Titan 23D lurking back there. Edited to add: S Titan 035 (18002349), a 23D son, sired 120 calves with the SR prefix. Probably just one of those honest mistakes that happen....and the gene managed to get carried forward for that many generations before it became evident that there was a problem.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 20, 2012 20:36:20 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 20, 2012 20:36:20 GMT -6
I think based on my conversations with John Ridder and Bob Schaffer that Monarch was an honest mistake. futhermore Oxleys imediately addressed the issue, unlike our 2 former AHA presidents that buried IE specifically in terms of 9012Y. I had dinner one night at KC back when this whole thing was starting to rear its head with one of the two and he just keep reeating 9012Y is clean we have bred 1/2 sisters to 1/2 brothers ect ect ect and never ever saw a problem. yeh right, since all the dirty laundry has been on the washline for a couple of years now. One thing about Horned breeders, thye usually correct a problem instead of burying it once it gets out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
23D ??
Feb 21, 2012 14:14:56 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2012 14:14:56 GMT -6
John, I've researched that out pretty good, and it's my conclusion that there is a pedigree error back in his pedigree somewhere on his sire's dam's(paternal granddam) side. For instance, if you search back into SR Robin Hood 249's pedigree, you'll see the Titan 23D lurking back there. Edited to add: S Titan 035 (18002349), a 23D son, sired 120 calves with the SR prefix. Probably just one of those honest mistakes that happen....and the gene managed to get carried forward for that many generations before it became evident that there was a problem. Pedigree error or mutations are always possibilities, but they aren't always the most probable possibilities. I heard another rumor on the pedigree.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
23D ??
Feb 21, 2012 14:27:54 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2012 14:27:54 GMT -6
I think based on my conversations with John Ridder and Bob Schaffer that Monarch was an honest mistake. futhermore Oxleys imediately addressed the issue, unlike our 2 former AHA presidents that buried IE specifically in terms of 9012Y. I had dinner one night at KC back when this whole thing was starting to rear its head with one of the two and he just keep reeating 9012Y is clean we have bred 1/2 sisters to 1/2 brothers ect ect ect and never ever saw a problem. yeh right, since all the dirty laundry has been on the washline for a couple of years now. One thing about Horned breeders, thye usually correct a problem instead of burying it once it gets out. Just looking at the pedigree, I would think that the two men you mention would be quite a distance from where the pedigree error on Monarch would have taken place. " One thing about Horned breeders, thye usually correct a problem instead of burying it once it gets out" I doubt anything would be said about these pedigrees being tainted if Tex Prime Time hadn't carriered DL. The old APHA did challenge some pedigrees, which probably led to its demise, and expunge some cattle from the record books. The APHA also gave some accused parties a chance to defend their pedigrees and prevail. I am still waiting for someone to tell me what cattle the AHA challenged and expunged. I get the line that in the AHA "we handle things differently". So what is the "unwritten" AHA policy, bad mouth those you suspect and spread the word to your friends before everyone finds out? As far as Oxley's addressing the issue, that is an address I must have missed.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 21, 2012 15:46:13 GMT -6
Post by George on Feb 21, 2012 15:46:13 GMT -6
Pedigree error or mutations are always possibilities, but they aren't always the most probable possibilities. I heard another rumor on the pedigree. I haven't heard such a rumor. I'm basing my conclusion on the fact that another son of SR Robin Hood 279, from another breeder, was confirmed as being a dilutor carrier as well. www.herfnet.com/online/cgi-bin/i4.dll?1=3E3F292A&2=232F50&3=56&5=2B3C2B3C3A&6=5A5D5C5A2526262420&9=5E5D5C Looking at 279 on the AHA web-site, the fact that he's listed as IEF, but nothing is said about his DL status, indicates - at least to me - that the owner(s) decided to not publish his DL status - which I'm sure the test for DL was done at the same time his IE status was determined. Pedigree error seems to be the most logical answer, rather than a mutation, and the gene came from 23D. That error could have come from faulty records - or just two cows swapping calves somewhere along the way.
|
|
|
23D ??
Feb 21, 2012 19:01:51 GMT -6
Post by bookcliff on Feb 21, 2012 19:01:51 GMT -6
|
|