Results: Hereford Breed Research Project

[Glenn]

I suppose that’s true but look how long it can stick around as well. I think we have to realize that Dr Beever is human like the rest of us and knows who “butters his bread” so not that he’d fabricate anything but you’re definitely going to get the “company line” version.

[lcc]

Nov 15, 2020 11:56:21 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

Strojans post on the other thread reminded me that a few months back I was reading some old threads here where Dr Beever was participating in them. Some good threads back there if you take the time to look. Anyway I remembered this one, thought it was relevant to this thread, especially where he writes about losing ancestors DNA in just a few generations.


old thread

What happened to Dr. Beever's cow that entered his ET program 8 years ago but hasn't had a calf registered since?

[jbeever]

She produced two embryos, both were bulls with more BW than acceptable and neither was registered. During her subsequent pregnancy, she slipped on ice-covered concrete and had to be euthanized at 13 yrs of age.

Glenn, in response to your supposition that I know "who butters my bread", yes, I do and it is not the AHA. I'm not beholding to anyone or anything except my own integrity.

In regard to the report, I find it very unfortunate that the observations that are indeed real are being used to support an agenda. There are MANY explanations as to the divergence between the populations, crossbreeding is a very minor one given the history of the populations used. I find the use of these data for the purposes detailed in this thread to be very, very unfortunate.

[George]

Good to see you commenting on HT again, Dr. Beever!

I certainly would like to hear your expanded thoughts regarding this research.

[Glenn]

Exactly. If you want to actually help us Philistines out please explain how disconnected the Lentz cattle are from everything else. I get why they are tightly clustered but with 99% plus of American Herefords supposedly descended from Anxiety 4th on the sire line and with L1 cattle being such a huge influence on NAD cattle from the 70s forward and the L1 cattle being Advance Domino (A4 breeding) in the sire line from his two sons that started the experiment, I truly am curious why they seem so disconnected from everything.

[lcc]

Nov 15, 2020 18:13:37 GMT -6 jbeever said:

She produced two embryos, both were bulls with more BW than acceptable and neither was registered. During her subsequent pregnancy, she slipped on ice-covered concrete and had to be euthanized at 13 yrs of age.

Ahh, I am sorry to hear that.

I like reading through some of the old threads on here, but sometimes the stories end abruptly, other times accounts have been deleted, references made to other threads I can't find etc. Sometimes its like reading chapters of a book, out of order. 

Anyway, appreciate reading your input, Dr. Beever. 

Back on subject, does anyone know if the white face is as dominant as I was always told it was? I didn't think Herefords were supposed to throw majority brockle faces when crossed, unlike several other breeds.
 

[redgem]

If there a hereford they have 2 kitH genes, the kitH gene expression is a 90% white face. Might be a small amount of colour, mostly around the eyes. If there is more than that there not hereford and the white face is coming from some other breed. The simmental and maine white face brookles easy.

[nomelherefords]

Very interesting research. This is my first post so hope I understand it properly. Seems to me there is much to be found by looking at this in the 3 D version. It appears the 2D plots hide a lot because they cant be rotated. Also seems to me the descendency relationship from the Anxiety 4 to the NAD is clearly visible in the C2C4 plot in the report. Perhaps the authors might be able to post another angle for the plot that shows it better.

[nomelherefords]

I have thought more about the concerns that there appears to be no suggestion in the research as to how a breed for which Anxiety cattle was so influential has transitioned to a completely new location and breed. Accordingly I have read the report a couple more times and it appears to me the answer to this question is in the pages of the report but not expressed as such. In addition to the C2C4 plot, C1C3,C1C4 and some alignments of 3D plot all show linear progression from one to the other to some degree. The author also casts significant doubt on the story describing the origins of the poll Hereford. If the author is correct then it identifies significant experimentation using other breeds took place in the early 1900's and it would be naive to think the experimentation stopped once the poll Hereford was "born" or that it was limited to just developing the polled Hereford. This represents a culture of experimentation within the North American breeding that has disregarded the specifics of a closed herd book for at least 120 years within a small but influential group of breeders. Now going to the report it shows 1) the original population Anxiety cattle, 2) a new hybridized breed described as NAD and then 3) a group of crossbred animals in the red rectangle section at least some of which have been promoted / are superior "Hereford" genetics: bigger, better, etc etc.. For selective breeding being what it is, these animals have been an enticing appeal and when bred back into the main body of the NAD has moved the NAD towards the red rectangle animals and further away from Anxiety. Turn the clock back now to the 1900 and if the author is correct the north american component of the C1C4 plot would look similar to it is today except the NAD would be where the Anxiety (NAD didn't exist) are located now and the red rectangle animals would be filled up with the "on the edge" original polled and other animals resultant from the wider experimentation. In turn selectively breeding these red rectangle animals back onto the generic Anxiety began to split the generic Anxiety cattle into two groups. The first was the generic Anxiety cattle of which the Anxiety 4 steadfastly stuck to the principals of line breeding and have remained in the same / close location. The second group was the mix of Anxiety type cattle and red rectangle animals. Repeat this process every 5 or so years and you have a cycle that has slowly but surely widened the gap between the Anxiety type cattle every time it has gone around and in so doing created the NAD hybridized breed. To summarize, if this cycle is repeated every 5 years from 1900 there has been about 60 cycles of hybridization which has moved the Anxiety type cattle to where the NAD of today are located, leaving the Anxiety cattle in or close to the location they have always been. Just a hypothesis.

[woodford]

       Dr. Beever,

     It is indeed unfortunate, but it appears that we are not in agreement as to what is the unfortunate part of this.

     As for an agenda, my own agenda, if there is one, is to show breeders of NAD that there is, and has been, crossbreeding within the registered North American Hereford breed, that this is dangerous to the breed, and that this could possibly be an avenue of litigation against Hereford breeders if the issue is not dealt with in an obvious and above board manner. 

     ABRI would not have had its law firm create what is commonly referred to as the Moin Report, if ABRI was not aware of admixture problems within the breed. Obviously ABRI was concerned that they would eventually be held accountable, and took steps to make it very clear that they would not take any responsibility for this issue. ABRI also made in extremely clear that the breed associations had no choice but to deal with the problems themselves, or eventually be made to face the consequences.

     The report under discussion here is based upon sound sound science that says that crossbreeding is an issue within the NAD. It is the latest of several scientific papers saying the same thing with each paper being even more detailed than the last. This paper has identified significant percentages of several breeds of cattle within large numbers of NAD. These are breeds of cattle that true Hereford cattle are not related to at all. You yourself have said that " the observations that are indeed real ", but also that "There are MANY explanations as to the divergence between the populations, crossbreeding is a very minor one"

     I for one, would be very pleased to learn that crossbreeding is a minor problem, and that there are many explanations. What puzzles me, is that you merely say that there are MANY explanations, but you didn't offer even one.  

     Would you please give us a few of the many explanations that you write of?

     Steven W. Pollestad

     "Woodford"
   
    
     

[woodford]

     There have been several questions asked on this thread over the last few days that have not been answered. Several are beyond my pay grade to answer, and have been sent on to people that are more qualified. Hopefully those answers will come soon.

     However, there are a couple that I can take a stab at.

     This is a set of answers for the did we use miniature Hereford samples, were any small framed Herefords designated as NAD used in the study, and were the profiles sorted by coloring questions.

          1.)We did not get any miniature Hereford samples, but my personal opinion is that it probably wouldn't have made a lot of difference. If there is someone wishing to donate a sample of two, I will have to check with the people in charge in order to see if there is any interest in having them.

          Our samples were not selected or sorted for frame size. In fact, we don't really know the exact frame size of many of the NAD profiles that we have. The same goes for coloring. The goal of the samples selected was to get the broadest, or most comprehensive, genetic view of the NAD animal, both Horned and Polled, and as far back in time as it was possible to get. I think that I said 1962 was the oldest sample we have, but it might be '63. Our sample's birth years span from '63 to present day without a gap year, and usually there are several profiles per birth year.

Pedigrees were consulted a great deal in order to have as diverse a NAD group as we could get, and also helped a great deal when looking for possible bias.  As the Report says, the genetic data was put into the system blindly, or however it was described, and the genetic data sorted itself out according to the genetic information.

Another reason the pedigrees were very useful was they would indicate when parent verification should be checked. Because there were several profiles that followed bloodlines in direct generations, parent verification made a useful tool to verify that the samples were what they were supposed to be.  Some of the animals in the parent verifications were high in crossbreeding percentages, and some were low. It is my belief, but I never thought to ask, that these were very useful comparing genetic drift of NAD both with, and without high concentrations of non-Hereford genetics.

          2.)An addition to the frame question is the Report's reference to the Brae Arden herd. This herd came to our attention through this forum, and the owners kindly gave us some samples. This herd would probably be considered smaller to average in frame size. This herd has been entirely closed since 1928, I believe.


         3.) Genetic Drift. The data was quite conclusive that the major changes within the NAD were not from natural genetic drift alone, and that non-Hereford genetics hastened the drift away from the OP position.


         4.) 19 OP Samples. I don't know the exact number OP profiles that were used in the study, but it was quite a few more than nineteen. If you look at the Report again, the named nineteen animals were first used in the study of Ogden's that was done for the UK government. This set of nineteen was included, and was only a portion of the OP samples tested for this Report.


That is about all I can answer, so I'll sign off.


Woodford


          

[tartancowgirl]

Hello everyone.
I have not posted for a while but have been following discussions on Hereford Talk regularly. As some of you will know, I have had some inside knowledge on this subject for a long time, and I am delighted that the report has now been published. Personally I have no "agenda" other than an interest in HOPs and I have always said on here that I believe everyone has a right to breed the type of cattle that suit their system and their market. In fact, I think that everyone who has anything to do with a breed has an "agenda". Nevertheless the report raises interesting questions and it is helpful if it is discussed sensibly, as people on here are doing. The issue we have in the UK is complete denial, which is not helpful at all, sadly. I feel that the main problem we face is not the NAD, horned or polled, but the so-called "red box" animals, which do not align with either population. The Anxiety 4 do align in certain views of the 3D graphs, as has been said. There are a few points that the geneticist should comment on - hopefully he will have time to do so soon. As to whether this worked is peer reviewed - the answer is yes.

One of our group who is really knowledgeable has created some answers - he is not on HT, so has asked me to put his reply on here:

 "I do not criticise soherf’s comments without due cause but it is easy to make assumptions. Parental verification does only one thing. It verifies whether the two animals stated are the parents of the animal under scrutiny. It does not verify whether this animal, or its parents belong to a breed, until a breed profile has been determined and published, in a scientific paper, and then these animals are subject to complicity with the genetic markers for the breed.



The assumption that the Hereford profile is the same world-wide, and that is verified by the American Hereford Association is questionable at the very least. Even their history books acknowledge that the Hereford breed of cattle takes its name from the area of the UK called Herefordshire, and the descendants of this breed travelled far and wide across many of the continents of the World. However, there has always been a presence of the Hereford Original Population in the UK, and still within the confines of Herefordshire itself. The Hereford Herd Book was closed to outside “Genetics” in 1886, as was the US Hereford Herd Book three years earlier. If the assumption that the profile was the same worldwide was correct, then there should only be minor differences in the DNA profile due to environmental factors.



The next three statements are most interesting. Herefords, particularly North American Herefords, particularly Polled Herefords in the UK, are advertised and sold on one major factor, their considerably larger size when compared to their English counterparts. If you have a “Pure-bred” closed breed, one of the purity factors will be consistency of the shape, food requirements and meat yield, to complete the life of said animals. To verify claims made about the origin of the meat within the UK and its association with a specified breed you require a test, which will be, in today’s legislation, a genomic test. In yesteryear it was a characteristic, in the case of the Hereford that was the production of a “White face”. This brings us to Page 6 paragraph 4 - soherf’s criticism of this leading to the possibility that “Mis assignment between the NAD and HOP was possible”. I would suggest that it would be wise to look up and read the references given – FA0125 was actually the final part of a series of research papers undertaken by Edinburgh Zoo or TRACE, on behalf of the UK GOVERNMENT, to produce accurate, but at least cost, verification testing for the origin of meat from all noted beef breeds, sold over the counter in a shop or supermarket, by the local “Food Standards Agency”. The three research papers were Q01130, FA0112, and FA0125.



The genetic group used 90 SNPs to identify the differences between the breeds under scrutiny, the Hereford being one. In the first instance the researchers were looking for a simple 14 to 18 SNP out of 90 SNPs for a test to identify all breeds. The HOP, or using the name used in FA0125, the “Traditional Hereford”, required 8 SNPs to correctly assign the animal to their breed profile. In the case of the NAD, it required in excess of 20 SNPs to accurately assign the animal to their breed profile. However, the real point of this is the amount of commonality in the test, which is 5 SNPs. As five are common to both groups, then the difference between the two Herefords is in excess of 18 SNP markers, which in terms of the research indicated about the average number of SNPs, (14 to 18 SNPs), to distinguish between different English breeds.



To verify the results of Q01130 and FA0112, FA0125 took a sample from every living female line, (a female from that line being sampled), and from every bull from a different female line no longer present in the UK. These samples were all from bull semen collected and stored by a farm animal Conservation Society, under the regulation of preservation of Breed Original genetics. All of these bulls were born between 1955 and 1975, when the Hereford Herd Book was closed from entries other than those born in the UK and Ireland. These samples were split into two, one processed in FA0125, and the second part of the same sample was sent to Neogen to produce a 50k SNP profile, and then on to Missouri University, where it was analysed by Lynsey Whitacre, Jeremy Taylor and Jared Decker. The samples from the UK were complimented by further samples from Australia and Anxiety 4th cattle of Jim Lents. Jerry Taylor’s comment at the time (2015), from the results of this research was that the US Hereford and the Hereford Original Population were related, but only distantly. The present study used samples from many more living HOP animals.
(ie not 19)


The observations of many of those who have passed comment is quite interesting and demonstrates that most of the posts have not read the paper through with the degree of thoroughness require to make the statements they have put onto the site. The comparison between the two groups in C1:C4 of Hereford HOP and NAD, is distinct, the relationship between the HOP and the Lents in C1:C4 seems to indicate no relationship between the two: however, if you compare C2:C4, then a much closer relationship is on view. Part of this difference in respective positions may be explained partly by the fact that of the twenty female lines in the Lents cattle, only one is common to both the Lents and the HOP. The other 19 cow families are no longer present in the HOPs. This and the small amounts of variation within a group that has 130 or so years of separation, and the loss of these female lines in the HOP could give a basis to the hypothesis that separation and the loss of aligned female families is the explanation for what is observed today.



I hope that what has been clarified here will give those who are interested a clearer analysis of the research and what it indicates."

[rockmillsherefords]

After pondering over the latest documentation I've come to the conclusion the only way we can be genetically that different from op Herefords would be that the original imported animals were in fact halfbreds themselves. We should sue these early british breeders for fraudulent misrepresentation.

[nomelherefords]

Rockmillsherefords. I have looked into the Anxiety 4 history and I can confirm the herd currently has at least 15 or 16 different cow families. As included in tartancowgirl's post, only one of these 15 or 16 is not extinct in the UK HOP population. However that doesn't mean they have not been sampled in the research. Not being privy to the details of the research I don't know, but if the research has followed the same scientific sampling protocols that was followed in the UK to sample one of every living cow family, most if not all these Anxiety 4 cow families would have been sampled in the research to arrive at the Lents profile depicted in the report plots. If this is correct, and maybe somebody close to the research can confirm this, that the Lents profile is so tight only proves that all the 15 or 16 cow families follows the same findings in the HOP's and that is they are all very similar with little variation.

[nomelherefords]

Rockmillsherefords. If you look at the names of the breeders whose cattle were the early import to the USA, they are the same names whose cattle were the early imports into Australia and like the Lents cattle are clearly HOP and most defiantly the foundation of the current Australian NAD. Are you saying that each of thee breeders had two herds, one purebred to export to Australia and one crossbred to import into the USA?

[redgem]

You need to remember what things were like when the hereford arrived, almost no fences, everything was done on horse back, and so on.

A reminder that there was a bunch of animals in the L1's that had spots after many years of linebreeding. Thought was that it came from a longhorn that was missed.

It's is more important to see that there's a view were all the herefords are close to a straight line up and down and separate from the other breeds. Hopefully that's the DNA that makes herefords, a hereford.

[George]

Nov 20, 2020 20:33:08 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

After pondering over the latest documentation I've come to the conclusion the only way we can be genetically that different from op Herefords would be that the original imported animals were in fact halfbreds themselves. We should sue these early british breeders for fraudulent misrepresentation.

Good to see that your sense of humor hasn't left you, Paul! It's been hard to keep mine in these times.

[strojanherefords]

Nov 21, 2020 10:33:32 GMT -6 George said:

Nov 20, 2020 20:33:08 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

After pondering over the latest documentation I've come to the conclusion the only way we can be genetically that different from op Herefords would be that the original imported animals were in fact halfbreds themselves. We should sue these early british breeders for fraudulent misrepresentation.

Good to see that your sense of humor hasn't left you, Paul! It's been hard to keep mine in these times.

I have come to the opinion that the Traditional UK Hereford as it exists today is not the Original Population Hereford. Over the past 140 years, the UK Herefords, like the Herefords in the colonies, have lost much of the HOP gene pool.  

[George]

Nov 21, 2020 19:07:58 GMT -6 strojanherefords said:

Nov 21, 2020 10:33:32 GMT -6 George said:

Good to see that your sense of humor hasn't left you, Paul! It's been hard to keep mine in these times.

I have come to the opinion that the Traditional UK Hereford as it exists today is not the Original Population Hereford. Over the past 140 years, the UK Herefords, like the Herefords in the colonies, have lost much of the HOP gene pool.  

There's a lot here that needs further explanation in my mind - and probably further research. The only thing I can be reasonably certain about is that Titan 23D(and 7777) was a crossbred and that it's likely that 15G was in the same boat.

I have my theories about other things, but I don't know if there is enough evidence in this research to back any of them up without being able to view individual results.

I would LOVE to be able to see the composition reports from tests done on some of these more recent goggle-eyed wonders. As well as some of the widely used sires that I have WONDERED about. M326, 3027, 0024K etc. Did I step on enough toes there?

[alex]

Nov 20, 2020 20:33:08 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

After pondering over the latest documentation I've come to the conclusion the only way we can be genetically that different from op Herefords would be that the original imported animals were in fact halfbreds themselves. We should sue these early british breeders for fraudulent misrepresentation.

Remember, when there was great demand in America in the early 1880’s and England was being combed for Herefords to send across the Atlantic, the English herd book was opened for the entry of many short-pedigreed cattle whose ancestors had not been previously recorded. This began with volume 14 of the English herd book. There were so many questionable cattle coming in that the new American Hereford Cattle Breeders’ Association adopted a rule, effective March 1, 1883, that all animals whose sire and dam were recorded, in Volume 13 or preceding volumes of the English Hereford Herd Book, should be accepted and those not entitled to record under the foregoing rule, must “show sire of recorded pedigree in either the English herd book or American Hereford Record, and the pedigree of the dam must include name, date of birth, owner, sire and dam through four crosses, and shall end in the herd of a reputable breeder in England whose herd is of undoubted purity.” Just a few years after this was when the first Registered Herefords that were polled started showing up in American herds that Gammon started collecting if your not into the mutation theory. Edited.

[rockmillsherefords]

Nov 21, 2020 10:33:32 GMT -6 George said:

Nov 20, 2020 20:33:08 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

After pondering over the latest documentation I've come to the conclusion the only way we can be genetically that different from op Herefords would be that the original imported animals were in fact halfbreds themselves. We should sue these early british breeders for fraudulent misrepresentation.

Good to see that your sense of humor hasn't left you, Paul! It's been hard to keep mine in these times.

It's history George, we can't change it, no use dwelling on it, make the best of it and move on.

[George]

Nov 22, 2020 20:26:47 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

Nov 21, 2020 10:33:32 GMT -6 George said:

Good to see that your sense of humor hasn't left you, Paul! It's been hard to keep mine in these times.

It's history George, we can't change it, no use dwelling on it, make the best of it and move on.

My comment about keeping my sense of humor was more about current events than this report, Paul. But your advice probably is good for that as well, as long as an old phart like me gets to move on. The coronavirus and 3 so-called "high risk" people living in the same household is sure cramping my preferred lifestyle.

Regarding this report, I had been unofficially warned about 15G's status months back. It is ironic that, for 18 years, I had made so many breeding decisions that were based on keeping Titan 23D blood out of my herd - only to essentially end up with the same thing with 15G. 15G is in the pedigree of every cow I own. But that number is under 25, now, so I am in full "hobby rancher" status. I am even considering using some of that S Titan 7777 semen that I have left - and registering the calves. LOL!

[rockmillsherefords]

Looking at George's Titan pedigree report, and still thinking that this whole paper/study doesn't add up and the fact that most if not all DNA is lost 3 or 4 generations back where did the 13% L1 breeding come from.

[George]

Nov 27, 2020 22:28:35 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

Looking at George's Titan pedigree report, and still thinking that this whole paper/study doesn't add up and the fact that most if not all DNA is lost 3 or 4 generations back where did the 13% L1 breeding come from.

Paul, since 23D's pedigree shows nothing about him being a Simmental crossbred, I have to assume that nothing showing on his pedigree is correct. There could be a L1 bull that was his grandfather on the side that wasn't Simmi.

[rockmillsherefords]

Nov 29, 2020 14:28:04 GMT -6 George said:

Nov 27, 2020 22:28:35 GMT -6 rockmillsherefords said:

Looking at George's Titan pedigree report, and still thinking that this whole paper/study doesn't add up and the fact that most if not all DNA is lost 3 or 4 generations back where did the 13% L1 breeding come from.

Paul, since 23D's pedigree shows nothing about him being a Simmental crossbred, I have to assume that nothing showing on his pedigree is correct. There could be a L1 bull that was his grandfather on the side that wasn't Simmi.

So you're taking for granted that the study/papers are in fact correct in their assumptions. Interesting, so no one thinks this is a little weird, 27 polled animals mostly off to one side which I would expect, that's roughly 800 horned that for the most part are in a nice group that suggest they've all been crossbred with more or less the same breed and have very little relationship with the original breed they came from. That's a lot less than a 50% relationship with OP. Somethings missing there to me.