|
Post by littlecowfl on Oct 12, 2010 8:51:32 GMT -5
Why are some breeders doing this? What advantage are they looking for?
I am a strong believer in higher genetic variability so I am puzzled by this.
|
|
|
Post by kansasdexters on Oct 12, 2010 9:45:50 GMT -5
Breeders that want to develop specific characteristics and traits in their cattle by careful selection and mating choices accomplish this by essentially "closing" their herd and utilizing the best breeding stock within their herd to develop their own "breeding line". Additional desirable genetics can be introduced (as needed) with the use of artificial insemination or embryo transfer.
A closed herd has an advantage in that the animals within the herd are no longer being exposed to potential carriers of diseases or parasites brought in from outside the herd by newly purchased animals. (BTW, newly purchased animals should always be quarantined for 30 to 45 days, prior to introduction into an established herd).
In order to successfully breed within a closed herd, the herd must have a sufficient population of quality animals to begin with. A closed herd comprised of only a few animals may soon become too inbred and the vigor and quality of the animals being produced may suffer for it.
A breeder that is unwilling to cull undesirable traits or a breeder that is ignorant of genetics and the consequences of specific selection decisions may also not be successful with a closed herd. Good recordkeeping, thorough genetic testing, and thoughtful selection choices make all the difference between success and failure in keeping a closed herd going. Most hobby breeders really don't have the know-how, the time or desire, and/or the resources to effectively operate a closed herd, IMO.
Patti
|
|
|
Post by littlecowfl on Oct 12, 2010 11:25:50 GMT -5
I am glad closed herds are using AI. I was worried about excessive inbreeding. Interesting points made here. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by cddexter on Oct 12, 2010 12:09:19 GMT -5
hope you don't mind if I wade in... Patti, just how do you define a 'hobby' breeder? Only a few animals? Keeping cattle as pets? People who never cull?
The whole idea of 'breeds' in the first place was to create groups of animals that were similar, consistent, and useful (i.e. to us, in terms of yield and being able to count on what you got when you put two of the same type together). So, early herds were all closed or close to it. Then the breeding and selection started, with exchange of bulls or a top cow between those working on that 'breed', and heavy culling took place, too. That's how we got the named breeds: all pretty much identical except for those few cosmetic traits that 'defined' the breed.
Closed herds do work, but you have to have enough animals to keep several subherds within the whole, and be able to add genes in small doses, by moving ONE animal from one group to another group every so often. As you say, the animals must be of high quality to start with, or you'll get some real stinkers, as one is magnifying the genes in a big way.
Partly through curiosity, partly through laziness, partly through convenience, I did a line-breeding experiment with the few animals I have left. I now have a 7/8 heifer whose mother, grandmother and greatgrandmother are all the same cow, by the cow's son and grandson. The heifer is dropdead gorgeous: great topline, a leg at each corner, big muzzle, good body depth, good legs, small like her mother. BUT OH, HER FEET! The fdn cow is 1/2 woodmagic, and has pretty flat feet. Those feet got passed on and multiplied, and now the heifer has almost no heel at all. So, I now know that overall, the quality is incredible, and when it comes time to breed her, I'd better look for a top quality bull WITH GOOD FEET. This experiment does pretty well prove that the genetic consistency I saw in my herd was real, and that anyone with a Hiyu animal can count on that consistency (but maybe want to look at improving feet).
Line breeding isn't just about exposing recessive traits. It's also about reinforcing good ones. Every time you introduce a new animal to the herd, you are introducing new genes, too, which is why it's so important to pick the right bull, not just the closest or the cheapest.
Some comments: Grinstead was not a closed herd. Lady Loder used brought-in bulls throughout her 50 -year reign.
You can't count on natual selection to take care of poor traits. Natual selection got us the dwarf gene, we just made things worse by selecting for it.
I do take exception to the term 'fad breeding' as a way of putting down imports. Red is a fad, but it's nothing to do with outside breeding stock. Except for Canada and the uS, all the other seven Dexter associations believe in upgrading. Remember there are only three or four genes different in selection between all the breeds. A liver is a liver, a tongue is a tongue, a tail is a tail. Color, coat length, patterns, a tendancy to milk or meat, and size are about the only things different between ALL breeds. That's why the boffins think five generations is as good as back to the original, and in the uS, mainstream breeds believe only THREE generations are good enough to be considered 'pure'.
I don't want to start another us vs. them fight about what makes purity. If you want to argue this again, we need to start a new thread.
Some diversity is a good thing, especially if you are talking about the current thinking and marketing of cereal grains. But those cases have been taken to the extreme. In Dexters, some will want to produce consistent, high quality animals, some will want to have a variety. There's a place for both. c.
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Oct 12, 2010 12:45:10 GMT -5
If you go to our info site www.broomcroft.info there's a couple of documents in the Downloads section headed Inbreeding. They are quite interesting, easy to read summaries by the experts. We've linebred/inbred for a few years. Had one line that did not work out so culled everything or took animals back into normal breeding, as appropriate. Also just put a cow that always produces good calves to her son who is also the best bull I've ever had. The result was the best bull calf I've ever had. BUT......when we handled him, he was a little monster and bawled his head off and thrashed about. So he got castrated . Really odd as his whole line are so calm.
|
|
|
Post by wdd on Oct 12, 2010 19:12:45 GMT -5
You know how to manage chondro. Could you manage meanness? Or excessive size? Or poor udders? Think about it. Yep, they all taste great as per another of your posts.
|
|
|
Post by cddexter on Oct 13, 2010 11:14:38 GMT -5
Well, Gene, we're never going to agree on this one. Since animals represented money 200 years ago, no one would deliberately select FOR a trait that cost them calves, aka income. Now that we have the tools to identify animals that are capable of having dead calves, some people put practical interests ahead of cute, and breed away from chondro. Sort of the like the newest fad for pushing A2 milk, dissing animals that are A1.
Your comment about dwarfs being 'tastier' is fascinating. The only dwarf I ate was a two-year-old cow and there was no discernable difference to me, so I'd like to hear from Clive on this one, as he has tons of experience, and would know if this is perception or real. After all, do the numbers: I've eaten one, you have a couple of cows, Clive has dozens and is in the meat business. I do know the dwarfs turn to fat a lot earlier, so killing age could make a difference--fat adding flavour. c.
|
|
|
Post by onthebit on Oct 13, 2010 11:59:27 GMT -5
Your comment about dwarfs being 'tastier' is fascinating. The only dwarf I ate was a two-year-old cow and there was no discernable difference to me, so I'd like to hear from Clive on this one, as he has tons of experience, and would know if this is perception or real. After all, do the numbers: I've eaten one, you have a couple of cows, Clive has dozens and is in the meat business. I do know the dwarfs turn to fat a lot earlier, so killing age could make a difference--fat adding flavour. c. Maybe if you are used to fatty beef ie; feedlot beef you would prefer a fattier Dexter....I find though that my grass only long legs have perfectly marbled and tender beef....
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Oct 13, 2010 14:30:23 GMT -5
One of the main problems with the major line I have been trying to breed is their moo. The mother of the line has the most powerful, monotonous, and plain loud moo I've ever heard. When she moos it blasts your head off; it hurts. She hits the same note every single time, it never changes. You remember the T-Rex in Jurassic Park, well I'm certain it was this cow put through an echo chamber.
She also comes up right behind you and points her head at you when you are not looking, and blasts it out.
She also passes that moo down to her daughters, so she must have two copies of the bad moo gene. If they had a DNA test for it, I'd certainly be testing.
|
|
|
Post by onthebit on Oct 13, 2010 22:07:30 GMT -5
O my- I own a cow with the T-Rex gene......
|
|
|
Post by onthebit on Oct 13, 2010 22:42:51 GMT -5
Genetic purity is what you would find in Adam and Eve. They shared the same DNA. Any offspring from them would also share their DNA. Every offspring from sexual reproduction would be identical to a clone. /quote] Pardon?
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Oct 14, 2010 12:56:17 GMT -5
Well, Gene, we're never going to agree on this one. Since animals represented money 200 years ago, no one would deliberately select FOR a trait that cost them calves, aka income. Now that we have the tools to identify animals that are capable of having dead calves, some people put practical interests ahead of cute, and breed away from chondro. Sort of the like the newest fad for pushing A2 milk, dissing animals that are A1. Your comment about dwarfs being 'tastier' is fascinating. The only dwarf I ate was a two-year-old cow and there was no discernable difference to me, so I'd like to hear from Clive on this one, as he has tons of experience, and would know if this is perception or real. After all, do the numbers: I've eaten one, you have a couple of cows, Clive has dozens and is in the meat business. I do know the dwarfs turn to fat a lot earlier, so killing age could make a difference--fat adding flavour. c. Shorties will finish earlier especially if on poor grazing. That's my experience anyhow. But at the end of the day, I think it's just down to finish. The flavour is in the fat and shorties put on fat earlier. I read somewhere that chondrodysplasia leads to obesity, so presumably that's why. So with a non-short you do need more time and/or better grazing, you will then get just the same marbling a bit later but also with more beef 9 times out of 10. Put it like this, we supplied the beef for the Great British Menu TV show where they invited 5o famous guests and 5 chef-gods from all over the world. The beef went down great and the Japanese 3 star chef-god said it was the finest beef imaginable, he was clearly extremely impressed. Everyone else commented very favourably on the beef as well. I'm not showing off, it was just straight-forward 100% grass/clover finished Dexter Beef as anyone who does it properly would produce, but it was also from one of the tallest Dexters I've ever had. I'd say shortie beef is not better as such, but it is earlier, or a bit easier on poor grazing. Anyhow, in a few minutes time, I'm just about to tuck into a shortie sirloin steak, so I may post again tonight and eat my words ;D.
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Oct 15, 2010 2:18:37 GMT -5
Well I've eaten my shortie steak and was disappointed. It was a nice steak but that's all. Even though well-marbled it didn't have that Dexter punch. I am very surprised indeed.
As it happens, even though we've done loads of animals over the years, we've never eaten heifers because we either keep them for breeding or they go to a butcher who will only have heifers and needs as many as he can get.
But the last four animals to go into the freezer, all different, 2 non-shorts, 2 shorts, are have a mild flavour.
Nothing has changed on the farm, same, grass and clover and loads of it. Animals taken at the usual age and with a good finish on them. Plenty of fat and marbling in the meat.
Does heifer meat have less flavour? Does anyone know?
|
|
|
Post by Olga on Oct 15, 2010 8:31:48 GMT -5
My Sioux must be related to your cow, Clive! Sometimes I wonder if she's deaf because she'll come to within 3 feet of me and moo and moo over and over, on the top of her lungs, gasping for air in between the moo-blasts.
|
|
|
Post by Star Creek Dexters on Oct 15, 2010 10:15:24 GMT -5
Maybe this is a Dexter gene? Sounds just like my cows, too! We can't have a conversation at the barn, because Glory will start trying to participate, mooing in, and you can't hear a thing over her! Maybe they are just sweeter and like to come up to you and tell you how they are today?
|
|