|
|
Post by George on Nov 30, 2020 12:40:14 GMT -6
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. Bear in mind that I haven't looked at this study with the scrutiny that you and some others have. I value your input, as it may be next year before I can dig into this subject deeper myself. Hopefully, a number of others will weigh in before that. Tim Bernt, when Glenn and I visited with him a few years ago, said that he believed the Hereford breed contained about 5% outside blood. At the time, I thought that was too high, but after study I eventually came to a similar conclusion. 7777's test results would fall in line with that theory, with 28% "unexplained". That would be the 25% Simmi plus the 3%-5% that I think runs in the background (pre 1970) of all North American Herefords - from all of the early (quoting L.P. McCann's book) "Poor fences, bad gates, lax management, incomplete or careless records and other human errors are responsible for about five percent (5%) error in the pedigrees of registered livestock, according to geneticists in the field of animal science." |
|
|
|
Post by cflory on Nov 30, 2020 14:56:23 GMT -6
I think Tim is dreaming if he says only 5%. 10-15 wouldn’t surprise me.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockmillsherefords on Nov 30, 2020 22:53:16 GMT -6
If you look bar chart admix K=6 in the paper very very few op Herefords actually show as being pure, eyeballing it to me looks like they average around 75% op. So you start at 75% pure add one other breed and you're down in the 30's % pure add another breed and you're down to 15/20% pure which is about what that chart says, again eyeballing the average. So 20% op Hereford 80% something else. If I'm understanding that correctly. Feel free to correct me. Or you could look at it the other way and say we are 80% North American Hereford and around 20% crossbred with op Herefords.
Keeping the horns limits what they were crossed with. I'm done time to move on.
|
|
|
|
Post by soherf on Dec 1, 2020 8:17:27 GMT -6
If you look bar chart admix K=6 in the paper very very few op Herefords actually show as being pure, eyeballing it to me looks like they average around 75% op. So you start at 75% pure add one other breed and you're down in the 30's % pure add another breed and you're down to 15/20% pure which is about what that chart says, again eyeballing the average. So 20% op Hereford 80% something else. If I'm understanding that correctly. Feel free to correct me. Or you could look at it the other way and say we are 80% North American Hereford and around 20% crossbred with op Herefords. Keeping the horns limits what they were crossed with. I'm done time to move on. With OP Herefords only having 75% OP blood then would a fair assesment be that they really don't know what defines Hereford? If OP cattle should be 100% OP blood then it looks more like they are hunting the wrong rabbits from where I'm sitting. To the early post about parentage verification, yes it will only link the animal to it's parents if they are on file but it starts to lay the foundation one brick (test/generation) at a time. Other breeds have done it and we could too if the AHA membership wanted it to be that way. |
|
|
|
Post by nomelherefords on Dec 1, 2020 22:43:18 GMT -6
I can help with the interpretation of the K6 plot. It is totally incorrect to say that the HOP is only about 75% pure. What K6 is saying for the HOP is fairly much the inverse of what the K6 plot is saying for the NAD. The grey section at the top of the HOP group is the representation of the SHARED relationship the NAD has with the HOP and likewise the blue section at the bottom of the NAD is the representation of the HOP shared relationship with the NAD. The existence of the grey in HOP and blue in the NAD is to be entirely expected given the NAD is a distant relative of the HOP and continues to have a genetic relationship to the HOP and the HOP continues to pass on some of its genetics to the NAD breed. But if the NAD breed keeps going the way its going it wont be long before there is little or no relationship with the HOP and this can already be seen in some K6 NAD and also in photos of NAD cattle with disproportionate humps, no white socks, different white face etc etc . In summary HOP and NAD breeders shouldn't be reading anything into the the grey section in the HOP and blue section in the NAD other than this represents their shared origin of the two breeds and is to be expected. What you need to be looking at is the presence of other colours in the HOP and NAD groupings and what it says more than anything else is that the HOP and NAD are two different breeds of cattle with a shared origin. In the case of the HOP it has something like 95% Hereford content which in the context of statistical analysis is pure. ON the other hand the NAD has only about 20% of its genetic makeup reflecting its HOP origin and a large grey unexplained section which when put together with the HOP has hybridized into a different breed but with HOP origins. How the grey section has come about in the NAD is anybody's guess as the research was not designed to determine the ancestry of the NAD but rather to measure the NAD breed.
|
|
redgem
Weanling
Enter your message here...
Posts: 107 
|
Post by redgem on Dec 2, 2020 6:37:11 GMT -6
Without knowing pedigrees many of the dots outside of the main group mean nothing in my opinion. Even if there horned are they from polled parents, how many track back to the blood lines that are already questioned and when we're they born etc. I would like to see where Maines and Red Holstein are on the graphs.
What I see is that on the graph C1 vs C4 most of the herefords are well separate from the Angus and Simmental and that is good. That is where the herefords advantage is in cross breeding. That's what we need to focus on going forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by woodford on Dec 2, 2020 7:47:32 GMT -6
Just caught up on reading up on the last few days of the thread, and there are a few things that may be of interest here.
The 800 odd samples that the AHA gave permission to be used in the Whitacre, Taylor, and Decker work were not actual samples. They were SNP’s that were put together by the AHA for the purpose of scientific research, and were used in other research projects before the 2015 paper. We should also remember that SNP’s have only become used relatively recently by the AHA after they upgraded from microsatellite in the 1990’s(?) or so. Since the purpose of these SNP’s was for genetic research, I think that it is safe to assume that the set is likely to be the AHA’s chosen genetic representation of the breed.
In fact, it is my belief that the set of profiles put together for the research is actually more representative of the entire NAD Hereford than those that were provided by the AHA. I very much doubt that the AHA profiles would have included any Anxiety 4, Brae Arden, or some of other older bloodlines that are in this Report.
Nor, in my opinion, is it likely that the AHA profiles reach as far back into time as the report profiles do. The profiles of the Polled and Horned cattle both have their own genetic timelines that date from the late 1960’s to present day and show the progression over time rather than a snapshot in time.
Because of these timelines, most of the samples were semen instead of hair, although we did have both types of samples. The hair samples we used were nearly all of animals that were living at the time that we received them.
Regardless of the criticisms of real, or perceived, flaws of the Report, it was not based upon assumptions, but upon the scientific research of the genetics of what we call the Hereford breed. This was done using the most diverse genetic representation of the registered Hereford breed as circumstances allowed at the time. This resulted in what is very likely to be the broadest representation of the genetics of the registered Hereford breed to have ever been used for research of the breed to date.
The purposes of the project was to further research the differences or similarities of the OP and NAD, and to determine if it was possible to create a genetic test that could accurately differentiate between the two. The project’s purposes did not include investigating the relationships between various NAD populations, for example: the relationships between the NAD bloodlines, and the Anxiety 4 bloodline.
My understanding is that this is possible, and that further study could be done on this very topic. However research costs money, and if anyone out there would like to see further research in this direction, then donations would certainly be welcome.
Woodford
|
|
|
|
Post by George on Dec 2, 2020 8:55:23 GMT -6
Regarding the Anxiety 4th bloodline cattle, as someone who has actually seen the Lents cattle as early as in the 1960s, I can say that there were already some phenotypic differences between the Lents cattle and most of the rest of the mainstream Anxiety 4th cattle at that time.
Since Jim Lents is really the only Anxiety 4th breeder that stayed the course and closed his herd, his cattle are what has become the "poster child" for Anxiety 4th cattle. Except for a few old pharts like me, today's breeders are unaware that there were a different type of Anxiety 4th cattle that existed before the continental invasion and the frame race.
But the Anxiety 4th cattle that we had, and many of our fellow breeders in Texas had, at that time were of a different phenotype than the Lents cattle. If you look at the old Hereford Journals of that time, you can see the difference. The modern day herd that reminds me MOST of OUR type Anxiety 4th cattle is the Deewall herd. If you look at the Deewall cattle, then at the Lents cattle, I think you can see much of the same phenotypic difference that I was seeing back in the 1960s.
All this to say that I don't know how much stock you can put into the division between the Lents Anxiety 4th cattle and the North American Herefords, because a LOT of that phenotype division was already in place in the 60s, even when compared to a lot of the other Anxiety 4th bloodline Herefords.
I don't even know if that is even relevant to this research study, but thought it was worth putting out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by saltamontes5 on Dec 2, 2020 14:54:15 GMT -6
Regarding the Anxiety 4th bloodline cattle, as someone who has actually seen the Lents cattle as early as in the 1960s, I can say that there were already some phenotypic differences between the Lents cattle and most of the rest of the mainstream Anxiety 4th cattle at that time. Since Jim Lents is really the only Anxiety 4th breeder that stayed the course and closed his herd, his cattle are what has become the "poster child" for Anxiety 4th cattle. Except for a few old pharts like me, today's breeders are unaware that there were a different type of Anxiety 4th cattle that existed before the continental invasion and the frame race. But the Anxiety 4th cattle that we had, and many of our fellow breeders in Texas had, at that time were of a different phenotype than the Lents cattle. If you look at the old Hereford Journals of that time, you can see the difference. The modern day herd that reminds me MOST of OUR type Anxiety 4th cattle is the Deewall herd. If you look at the Deewall cattle, then at the Lents cattle, I think you can see much of the same phenotypic difference that I was seeing back in the 1960s. All this to say that I don't know how much stock you can put into the division between the Lents Anxiety 4th cattle and the North American Herefords, because a LOT of that phenotype division was already in place in the 60s, even when compared to a lot of the other Anxiety 4th bloodline Herefords. I don't even know if that is even relevant to this research study, but thought it was worth putting out there. I think this comment pulls everything off topic entirely. This is a scientific paper. When someone is performing a study scientifically it is very helpful to have a standard to compare things to. If you are trying to measure something you need to all agree that a foot is a foot or a lb is a lb. The Lents herd like it or not, as it is has been described here is actually a "poster child" control group which has less to do with it being "Anxiety 4th", but rather how it has been managed. The provenance and genetic control and proof of control and custody that is at play here makes it one of the very best possible control groups or standards for this kind of study you could have. So I understand the value of using it in this case. In all likely hood the genetic drift if there is such a think is more likely due to outside genetics being pulled in than it is in a herd that has used the same genepool for over a hundred years now. I don't see any relevance to the comment that the Lents cattle are not phenotypically similar to other Anxiety 4th cattle of days gone by. From what I have seen those cattle really don't exist anymore anyway and likely their influence has been entirely wiped away or eroded due to the outside genetics and polled blood added into the main stream population at this point. It probably would have been interesting to include the Deewall herd here I agree with that, but making a statement that because there is a phenotypical difference does not in and of itself offer a true test of the data at hand. The Anxiety 4th cattle of any phenotype if they were truly Anxiety 4th would in this study bare a very close relationship, no matter what phenotype they were unless they received there phenotype form outside the genepool at some point along the way. No doubt back in the day there were many Anxiety 4th breeders and a lot more animals in the genepool so having more representatives reflecting different selection choices would have been the case resulting in stark visual differences. However, if the genepool was still closed it would still have the same origins and would have a very close relationship. With the Deewall cattle one has to estimate that there is likely a 40-50% relationship with the L1 due to the Arrow bull being pulled into the line up back in the late 80's. |
|
|
|
Post by woodford on Dec 3, 2020 9:17:22 GMT -6
Parent verification of all animals registered with the AHA would stop any more crossbreeding in the NAD, and sounds good in theory.
However the costs of genetic profiling of every animal in one’s herd would be very expensive, and would likely result in fewer registered Hereford herds, and breeders. Additionally, parent verification still doesn’t give any indication of what the percentage of non-Hereford genetics that there already is in an animal being considered for introduction into a breeding program.
The combination of parent verification and HTOPP together on new herd bulls or dams, plus a selection of a herd’s top cows, herd bulls, and/or replacement heifers, would give the breeder more useful genetic information at less cost over time. Once the breeder has sense of where their herd is at in the unexplained category, it would only require HTOPP testing of new animals as they come into the herd.
Woodford
|
|
|
|
Post by timbernt on Dec 4, 2020 7:09:11 GMT -6
When I look at the Hereford World every issue or sale catalogs, I see incontravertable evidence of our biggest name breeders and promoters breeding and promoting crossbred cattle that have been DNA tested and confirmed by AHA standards as purebred Herefords. I see no reason for the AHA to tax me an additional $15,000 initially and $5,000/year over and above my registration fees. As Steven said, I would tell these pretend breeders to stick it in their a$$.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockmillsherefords on Dec 5, 2020 19:21:47 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by rosefield on Dec 6, 2020 0:27:50 GMT -6
On the video, where are the traditional Hereford markings?
|
|
|
|
Post by rockmillsherefords on Dec 7, 2020 18:06:47 GMT -6
On the video, where are the traditional Hereford markings? That popped up on my facebook feed, thought it was funny beings we have this thread with the latest installment on purity. Actually goggles eyes, rednecks and red from the ground up have been in the Hereford breed forever, plenty of old photos around showing all those things. So what is traditional. Read the link below. Wrote in 1921 I believe. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Dec 7, 2020 18:33:02 GMT -6
On the video, where are the traditional Hereford markings? That popped up on my facebook feed, thought it was funny beings we have this thread with the latest installment on purity. Actually goggles eyes, rednecks and red from the ground up have been in the Hereford breed forever, plenty of old photos around showing all those things. So what is traditional. Read the link below. Wrote in 1921 I believe.Yeah but according to you and Doctor Beever we breed all the traits out in 3-4 generations. So they bred to a white faced (almost exclusively ) standard from say the 1930s through the 1960s. Yet those genes stuck around 25-30-35 generations? I’m so confused. |
|
|
|
Post by rockmillsherefords on Dec 7, 2020 18:49:48 GMT -6
Don't go blaming me for Beever's screw-ups  |
|
|
|
Post by rosefield on Dec 8, 2020 9:13:16 GMT -6
On the video, where are the traditional Hereford markings? That popped up on my facebook feed, thought it was funny beings we have this thread with the latest installment on purity. Actually goggles eyes, rednecks and red from the ground up have been in the Hereford breed forever, plenty of old photos around showing all those things. So what is traditional. Read the link below. Wrote in 1921 I believe.I guess that growing up and being around Hereford cattle that what I am used to seeing is the white face, white crest, white on the legs. There used to be many Herefords in our area and I don't remember seeing any goggles. It seems that from what I am reading and from some of the pictures, I myself am confused as to what is a Hereford supposed to look like! |
|
|
|
Post by Carlos (frmaiz) on Dec 8, 2020 10:04:20 GMT -6
That popped up on my facebook feed, thought it was funny beings we have this thread with the latest installment on purity. Actually goggles eyes, rednecks and red from the ground up have been in the Hereford breed forever, plenty of old photos around showing all those things. So what is traditional. Read the link below. Wrote in 1921 I believe.I guess that growing up and being around Hereford cattle that what I am used to seeing is the white face, white crest, white on the legs. There used to be many Herefords in our area and I don't remember seeing any goggles. It seems that from what I am reading and from some of the pictures, I myself am confused as to what is a Hereford supposed to look like! [i  Troble now is that we don't know from where googles do come. Hereford? Fleckvieh? Braham? But there were always present in the breed. |
|
|
|
Post by soherf on Dec 9, 2020 8:31:10 GMT -6
There was an old cowboy adage about horses with white feet which lead the person to believe that white feet on a horse was bad. Would it be safe to think this might have also applied to Hereford cattle during the same time? If you select for "red to the ground" you also get eye pigment in my experiences.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockmillsherefords on Dec 17, 2020 20:22:58 GMT -6
There was an old cowboy adage about horses with white feet which lead the person to believe that white feet on a horse was bad. Would it be safe to think this might have also applied to Hereford cattle during the same time? If you select for "red to the ground" you also get eye pigment in my experiences. Old english saying about horses..Four white socks keep him not a day, three white socks send him far away, two white socks give him to a friend, one white sock keep him to his end |
|
|
|
Post by phillse on Jan 15, 2021 12:28:37 GMT -6
I came across this research on another site. I thought I would share here as it relates to genetic identification of breeds. Crumbler researchAs I understand the research, It idententifies that Herefords have "genetic subpopulations within the breed" but that the subpopulations consist of 81% L1 genetics. Someone can read it in more detail and possibly find more nuggets of information. "Pedigree analysis for the Herefords within each subpopulation indicated that the subpopulations comprised animals from the highly inbred USDA Miles City Line 1 Hereford population (L1) and other individuals representing broader U.S. Hereford pedigrees. Since the founding of the L1 Herefords, the migration of germplasm has bee unidirectional from L1 into the broader U.S. industry, as the L1 population has been closed since its founding [18]. L1 Herefords do not segregate for recessive dwarfism, which has been a threat to Hereford breeders since the 1950s, and this has led to L1 cattle becoming popular in the process of purging herds of the defect [19]. In 2008, the average proportion of U.S. registered Herefords influenced by L1 genetics was 81% [18]." |
|
|
|
Post by strojanherefords on Jan 24, 2021 0:18:41 GMT -6
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. The worst thing I have seen about the breed composition questions is the rumors which stem from a lack of definitive answers. I think it would be best if you, Dr. Beever, addressed the rumors once and for all. A while back there was a post on Facebook about the origin of idiopathic epilepsy being the result of Simmental influence. I followed up with the fellow who made the post and he identified you as a source of the information. Dr. Beever, was idiopathic epilepsy or any other of the recent genetic defects associated with the infusion of non Hereford blood into the breed? |
|
