MSUD origins

[timbernt]

Now that MSUD has been around for a while and a lot of testing done, any thoughts as to the origin? Obviously on target 936 spread it widely, but there are a lot on the list that do not include him. Any thoughts? Personally I am very skeptical about spontaneous mutations being held up to explain "unknown origins".

[rockmillsherefords]

I believe if the genetic disorder can be traced back to one source then there's a chance it's a mutation in that animal, where they have multiple sources what's the chances of the same mutation happening in same spot on the genome multiple times.

[rockmillsherefords]

Maybe the folks in Wales are working on finding which breed had the original mutation and what year it was introduced, that's why we not heard anything lately.

[1780]

What I know is that Weatherbys in Ireland have as good as fingered short horn. The earliest evidence I can find is that it was first identified in Herefords in the mid 70's if my memory serves me, in Ontario in Canada. If I can find the paper to does everything except name the herd. I am not a fan of genetic mutations. Seems to be the convenient excuse for everything. Take for example the formation of the polled Hereford and Gammon's lies. In summary, purebred horned Herefords will throw a hornless progeny in 1 in 20000 births but this is a recessive gene. So if pure horned is always mated with pure horned the gene will never be dominant. Gammon may well be correct that what looked like a Hereford threw a dominant polled calf but somewhere back there there is a dominant polled animal that he may (or may not have) been aware of. Red Polled?? The irony is that the relationships between domonant and recessive genes was known about 1860 but the research was lost and not rediscovered until about the 1900 and I doubt very much that Gammon would have been aware, that he was heading towards scientific exposure. Some genetic mutation!!!!!!

[strojanherefords]

Jan 11, 2020 20:54:21 GMT -6 1780 said:

What I know is that Weatherbys in Ireland have as good as fingered short horn. The earliest evidence I can find is that it was first identified in Herefords in the mid 70's if my memory serves me, in Ontario in Canada. If I can find the paper to does everything except name the herd. I am not a fan of genetic mutations. Seems to be the convenient excuse for everything. Take for example the formation of the polled Hereford and Gammon's lies. In summary, purebred horned Herefords will throw a hornless progeny in 1 in 20000 births but this is a recessive gene. So if pure horned is always mated with pure horned the gene will never be dominant. Gammon may well be correct that what looked like a Hereford threw a dominant polled calf but somewhere back there there is a dominant polled animal that he may (or may not have) been aware of. Red Polled?? The irony is that the relationships between domonant and recessive genes was known about 1860 but the research was lost and not rediscovered until about the 1900 and I doubt very much that Gammon would have been aware, that he was heading towards scientific exposure. Some genetic mutation!!!!!!

So Peter, are you saying there are multiple dehorning genes? One dominant and one recessive.  

[1780]

It works like this regardless of breed. Horned animals have recessive "polled" genes. Polled animals have dominant "polled" genes.

If you mate a horned with a horned you will ALWAYS get horned with recessive "polled" genes. These progeny behave genetically as horned animals regardless and there is about 1 in 20000 chance that a progeny doesnt have horns but the gene remains recessive. Even if you mate this horned animal without horns to a horned animal the gene remains recessive and there is a 1 in 20000 chance that progeny doesn't have horns

If you mate a polled with a polled you will ALWAYS get polled with the dominant "polled gene. These progeny behave genetically as polled animals regardless and there is about (not sure of the stat but lets say 1 in 20000 chancefor the sake of this discussion) 1 in 20000 chance that the progeny has scurrs but the gene remains dominant.

Now if you mate a horned with a polled the progeny has a 25% chance of being dominant polled and if you then mate that animal with a polled you cement the dominant polled gene in place.

In summary, to create the polled Hereford Gammon had to mate an animal with a dominant polled gene to a Hereford (horned) because all Herefords are horned and all have the recessive gene. How did he do this - I suspect Red Polled that has a dominant polled gene. Firstly the colour is right and secondly we all know the coat colouring in a Hereford is a dominant gene so the progeny would look like a Hereford.

For the sake of the response i repeat.  The sad tragedy of this is that science knew all this in about 1860 but the scientific paper was lost and not rediscovered until the early 1900's by which time Gammon had done his damage. But, he who laughs last always laughs longest and Gammon, whether people want to admit it or not is being laughed at by the scientific world.  He told a lie to fiddle the  books which is the way it usually happens.