proposed genotyping

[rhonda]

I have been so worried about the proposed testing--let's just say my belt is pretty tight right now. I came across this and felt better..if it is passed, I have a while to get my girls done! I know it is a good thing for the breed. I wish they would bundle the costs of genotyping with chondro and pha..to me those would be the most important test to have.

Attachments:

[rezzfullacres]

I too am worried, worried that the motion made was made in haste, by an outgoing director, without consideration of all the facts. Currently there is a discussion as to which lab to use. Settle that first as they use different test types. Where is this all headed? It is headed toward parental verification of all calves. That is an admirable goal SO JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT, don't try to accomplish it in a sneaky way. IMO this issue should be put to a membership vote. So yes I am worried, worried an ill conceived, poorly written motion will become the law of the land. If parental verification is where we as an association want to go, so be it BUT lets do it right!!!!!The above is just my opinion...

[jamshundred]

Rezzful,

There are NOT two labs with two types of science. UCD has SNPS technology available. Wouldn't you expect that of the premier academic DNA laboratory in the country? UC-Davis developed DNA testing in cattle, you can expect they would be involved with SNPS capability as well. If there was a good reason to switch to SNPS for Legacy at this time, UCD would provide pricing and availability. If there are Dexter owners who want to switch to SNPS, Legacy would consider providing that medium for them.

However. . . SNPS is NOT ready for primetime parentage and not a necessary medium for the purposes of DNA genotyping and parentage confirmation. Microsatellite testing works best at this time. Members might consider asking those who represent them WHY they are being pushed towards a medium that may not be in their best interests or even in the best interests of the breed. Is it in the best interests of the association/ lab versus the members?

Dr. Cynthia Penedo, head of the UCD lab is on the ISAG board that is investigating and developing SNPS panels for parentage so UCD is in the forefront of the technology as one might imagine.

Kirk uses the larger breeds to buffer his argument for SNPS like Hereford, Angus, Charolais, and others who are using SNPS data for the genomic selection for economic traits. This is for the selection and marketing of traits believed to be desirable in the commercial market place of beef and dairy. Dexter cattle are NOT, and based on previous research and experiments, will never be a mainstream commercial breed. They are not "designed" for feedlots, and do we want them to evolve to that? And, though economically benefiting to the labs offering them, I have heard reports of dissatisfaction from folks in several breeds that these tests may not be quite all that is expected of them and that "one size does not fit all".

I am concerned that ADCA is more intent on looking out for the interests of ADCA and the ADCA private lab of Gus Cothran than it's members.

For example, many ADCA members are currently testing direct with UCD.
They are benefiting the experience and expertise of a laboratory overseen by PHD professionals and the regents of the University of California, ( while missing out on some of the pricing benefits originally negotiated by Legacy and the excellent service Legacy provides along with the entry into the genotype registry and PURPLE pedigrees that go along with the DNA test). They want their association and registry to switch testing to UCD. This would truly be a wonderful thing for the breed. All samples at one professional laboratory that has been doing this work for going on 7 decades and renowned worldwide, versus a lab set up by ADCA about 7 years ago.

It was suggested to ADCA in 2005 to use UCD when they had NO other lab in the US for needed testing. . . and they refused based on the most ignorant reason one could imagine. ( Personal and political - but certainly not scientific or professional). It is way past time to move ahead of that ignorance and look to the future best interests of the breed.

Ms Adams made a comment on a previous thread about Legacy entries being overseen by one person. Hypocritical when the Cothran lab is overseen by one person and she does not find issue with that? Heck of a difference between evaluating science and scientific results and making bookkeeping entries. UCD does not staff their lab with students overseeing testing/results. All testing with Legacy is overseen by a PHD with admirable scientific credentials of her own.

The lab you use and the test results you receive can have ramifications to our breed in various ways. A somewhat simple test could have economic if not life/death consequences. Take the example of the cow at the Missouri Dexter breeder's show. The owner submitted the A2 test to the Cothran lab but results never came, never came, though show and sale time did. . . . . . so the owner quickly submitted the animal to UCD and received timely results of A2/A2. Just before the show results arrived from the Cothran lab. . . . A1/A2. The cow was sold, ( so I've been informed) with that information. What if the test ( and correct result) had never been performed at UCD? Would the cow have sold for less? Would she have sold to someone looking for a dairy animal. Would she have been culled because of that result? There are certain tests and their results that can mean life or death for an animal.

I know of this situation through involved persons and personal relationships. It was never connected to Legacy otherwise I would not be able to use it as an example or mention it in anyway. Those present at the sale can attest to the accuracy of the event.

I question the rush to SNPS. There is not a bonifide good reason for it in this breed at this time or even into the future as much as I can see. It is however in the interests of others. Ask yourself who is looking out for YOUR interests.

Judy

[midhilldexters]

Rezz,
I made that motion. Which facts did I not consider?
The BOD had already discussed changing labs when I made the motion.
Poorly written? It’s the same as the bull one, I didn’t write that either. But it has worked.
You need to put pen to paper and write up a new one, I can always withdraw mine.
I don’t understand your sneaky comment , the motion is to genotype all our females and that in turn leads to a fully genotyped registry, why is that sneaky?
If it’s not what the membership want then so be it, but you know Rezz it got people talking and thinking and that’s a good thing, and if it doesn’t happen now believe me it will one day.
You mention doing it the “right way” what is the right way?
Just my opinion to.
Carol K

[midhilldexters]

Rhonda, I agree the cost is not fun and for those with big herds its very hard. There is a lengthy time frame to adjust written into the motion so hopefully it allows us all to take our time and the costs don't hit all at once.

Carol K

[rezzfullacres]

Feb 9, 2013 9:38:44 GMT -5 midhilldexters said:

Rezz,
I made that motion. Which facts did I not consider?
The BOD had already discussed changing labs when I made the motion.
Poorly written? It’s the same as the bull one, I didn’t write that either. But it has worked.
You need to put pen to paper and write up a new one, I can always withdraw mine.
I don’t understand your sneaky comment , the motion is to genotype all our females and that in turn leads to a fully genotyped registry, why is that sneaky?
If it’s not what the membership want then so be it, but you know Rezz it got people talking and thinking and that’s a good thing, and if it doesn’t happen now believe me it will one day.
You mention doing it the “right way” what is the right way?
Just my opinion to.
Carol K

The right way is not to put this on the back of a postcard that was for dues reminder and send it out, the right way would have to notify the membership in a more substantial manner, at least it is now on the website, that is an improvement but what about those that do not use internet? State what you want in the motion. Bulls and cows are like apples and oranges, most people have a couple of bulls at most but can have many many more cows...
"In order to fully implement parental verification of all calves registered in the ADCA as of "DATE" all cattle will require a genotype to be on file with "whatever Lab". Put whatever dates you wish but say what you mean...
My point as top the 2 different labs and 2 different tests is this......We need as an association to figure out which one of these tests is going to be the future, imagine testing your entire herd before the deadline and in a year or 2 you will need to retest with the newest and bestest because they do not crossover with each other.
My overall point is this; idea is a good one, need to get all of our ducks in a row as far as labs, systems etc. This is a BIG deal and needs to be brought before the membership

[dexterfarm]

How about lowering the registration fees. I have herd it said many times that the ADCA has a money surplus. How about lowering the fees.

[midhilldexters]

Well it got put on a postcard after my time with the BOD, but in all honesty at least then they know that people who are not on the web got a copy of the motion, so good for them.
I'm not sure what your Director is doing, but I know ours started a Facebook page to discuss the motion, I know other regions did to, and there has been some good points made. I know my Director wrote to those with no email addresses and asked for their opinions. If you don't know what your Director is doing then get in touch and ask. It's really no good voicing your opinion here and expecting the ADCA do something about it, they don't monitor forums generally, be in close contact with your Director.
Your motion says that "all cattle", if you wrote a motion like that you would have more questions, more issues than you knew what to do with. What does all cattle mean? Those that are in the registry now? Dead ones to? Old ones that not used for breeding anymore? I'm not looking for an argument, but you make a complicated issue sound very easy to do, and its not.

Carol K

[rezzfullacres]

Feb 9, 2013 13:08:31 GMT -5 midhilldexters said:

I'm not sure what your Director is doing,


I'm not looking for an argument, but you make a complicated issue sound very easy to do, and its not.

Carol K

My director resigned............ I never said it was easy and that is why the association needs to take a step back, review everything before moving forward....We are jumping to stage 5 without doing stage 3 and 4 IMO. How about we decide on a lab first?.....How about we poll the membership and see what the approximate rate of dropout is going to be?.....How about sending out a real notice about the proposed change? As I have said I believe the idea is sound but unless you build a house on a strong foundation it will collapse It is a simple fact. As of right now I would not support the motion as presented there are too many unknowns for it to be feasible, it can be fixed with concentrated effort, not 2 minutes at a computer, but real honest negotiations to address the concerns that have been presented. I am not looking for an argument either BUT I am looking out for what I feel is the best interest of the Dexter Cattle as we move forward and by doing that I believe the ADCA will benefit....

[dexterfarm]

I never got a notice. Just looked and found out that we have a different director now. dont know when that happened. I will contact the new one.
I would generally say i am for it but without more info I could not say yes or no.
I dont want to see this used to cut anyone off from registering offspring. specifically PDCA or Legacy. Mine are already parentage confirmed with UCD Legacy. I would expect those results would be accepted. But i would like to see that in writing. I dont want to pay to test again.
I think registration/ transfer fees should be lowered to offset the expenses.

[Cascade Meadows Farm - Kirk]

Feb 9, 2013 9:10:08 GMT -5 jamshundred said:

However. . . SNPS is NOT ready for primetime parentage and not a necessary medium for the purposes of DNA genotyping and parentage confirmation.

SNP is more than ready for prime-time. Most All the other major breeds including Angus and Hereford have already converted to SNP genotyping and parentage verification.

We should convert to SNP FIRST before testing scores of females, or we'll likely be very sorry when we have to redo them in SNP format.

"Note: Animals with microsatellite profile results may have to be
(re)tested using SNP technology"

www.hereford.org/static/files/factsheets/DNATestingProcedures.pdf

"The American Angus Association began accepting samples for SNP parentage testing in the fall of 2010. This new agreement allows breeders to request parentage from Pfizer Animal Genetics as either a stand-alone SNP test, or as an additional feature of HD 50K. Both options use the same SNP parentage markers."

www.angus.org/pub/newsroom/releases/033011_AngusParentageRelease.html

[midhilldexters]

Rezz,
ah sorry about you not having a Director, hope that gets fixed soon. Any of the other Directors will help you if you need something though.
I'm not sure if it eases your mind or not, but if you think about it, the Board really are trying to cover bases. I made the motion early Dec. Someone else made a motion to table it so there would be more time to think about it, my words not those of the ADCA.
They had been looking into using another Lab for quite some time, they really do try and do the best for the breed, they don't always get it right, but who does!
Although there are passionate people on this forum, it is very hard to get the majority of the membership to join in, hard to get them to vote, hard to get them to participate in much at times.
Hopefully the members will step up and voice their opinions and by the time the agm comes around we will have our answers.
I would encourage everyone to voice their opinions to their Director, or any Director or Pam Malcuit, they really do want input.

Carol K

[rezzfullacres]

Feb 9, 2013 9:10:08 GMT -5 jamshundred said:

Rezzful,

There are NOT two labs with two types of science.
Judy

I hope you simply misunderstood what I was saying but here goes...

There are 2 labs in question, Texas A&M or UCD....That is 2 by my count....

There are 2 separate DNA tests, SNP & MSP again 2 by my count

So yes there are 2 of each.......My point was and is.....The association needs to

1 pick a lab
2 pick a test
3 allow a membership vote
4 live with the result

[jamshundred]

Kirk,

With microsatellite testing there is an international standard that ALL labs are expected to meet with their marker results. The two labs that do the majority of the testing on Dexters other than UCD are not consistently testing to that standard. Their markers are at times different on the same case. This has created some parentage comparison issues. In one case, the markers were so different the owner had to get an aliquot of DNA from one of those labs and have it sent to UCD for retest. There are a number of cases where UCD had to contact a lab and ask them to redo their results according to standard so they could be used for comparison and there were others where an owner had to retest.

SNPS testing has not yet reached the stage where there is a clearly defined panel of markers that can be identified and used for parentage and that can be required for all labs to use for parentage comparisons. They are working on that. . . but it isn't established yet. Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for one lab to try to compare to another lab without a standard panel of markers identified and implemented? Do you think for a minute that the SNPS panels would be identical among the three main labs testing Dexters so that there would be no issues in comparisions for parentage? Remember. . . this issue is not about dairy traits or carcass traits or tenderness. .. the issue is parentage confirmation.

Another factor that should be considered carefully is Dexters are NOT a commercial breed. SNPS provides the ability for financially viable tests that give commercial breeders information to make economic breeding and marketing decisions based on tests designed to meet this purpose. It just isn't a technology we need in the Dexter breed. Microsatellites are capable of fulfilling every general Dexter requirement and if a random breeder here or there wishes to know if they have a tenderness gene in their bull and they are willing to pay for a test that may or may not give a breed specific answer than let them go to commercial outlets where that is available. Dexter owners in general are struggling to afford important tests in their herds and being small farms or hobby farms or homesteads they simply do not need nor will they likely make use of these types of tests.

Now for the BIG problem. Do you know how many genotypes are on file with ADCA? Legacy is nearing the middle of 1300-1400. Do you realize not a single one of these tests can be compared with SNPS? I was asked by the head of the UCD lab when told they would be willing to switch the testing to SNPS for Legacy, " but who is going to pay for the retests"? Who indeed? I'm not paying to retest my herd for a technology I simply do not need nor has anyone convinced me is needed in this breed. If you are hammering on a technology that is not necessary for the Dexter breed because you think it gives you the perfect "stall" and "excuse" not to DNA type or parentage confirm your herd that is one thing, but I absolutely don't want you to use that excuse to negate thousands and thousands of dollars of effort by those of us who felt it important and worthwhile for the ten years you have not. Read that again. . . . there are breeders whose effort numbers thousands and thousands of dollars who have always believed in the importance of validating our breed and now those of you who did not and would not. . . . . you want to make all that effort worthless? Your entire approach has been based on what Kirk wants and want Kirk thinks benefits Kirk, not reality based on what is in the best interest of the breed and other breeders. The Dexter breed does not need, nor will it in any way be enhanced by commercial SNPS testing.

So let's consider another factor. If there should come a time in the future when SNPS might or could be of any benefit within the Dexter breed, then perhaps it will be either scientifically or economically viable to convert without the scientific and economic disaster it would currently create.

Rezzful - I am willing to accept I completely misunderstood and you have made it clear now. I do want to commend both you and Rhonda for the courage to speak your concerns. I was the very first Dexter owner to DNA test my complete herd and to continue to DNA type every offsping and to encourage other Dexter owners to do the same. I was for it when others now pushing it for entirely different reasons were against it. I was for it before I was agin it! LOL ( Little tongue-in-cheek political jargon there). I am still for it, but I am against forcing it on the entire breed because I am fearful of losing more Dexters to drop out and some of our bloodlines can not sustain the loss. There IS a better way, and all the small breeders and homesteaders can count on Legacy to continue to look out for their interests because what is good for them is good for Dexters so Rhonda don't stress, if no one else has your back. . . Legacy will.

Judy Sponaugle

[jamshundred]

Kirk,

With microsatellite testing there is an international standard that ALL labs are expected to meet with their marker results. The two labs that do the majority of the testing on Dexters other than UCD are not consistently testing to that standard. Their markers are at times different on the same case. This has created some parentage comparison issues. In one case, the markers were so different the owner had to get an aliquot of DNA from one of those labs and have it sent to UCD for retest. There are a number of cases where UCD had to contact a lab and ask them to redo their results according to standard so they could be used for comparison and there were others where an owner had to retest.

SNPS testing has not yet reached the stage where there is a clearly defined panel of markers that can be identified and used for parentage and that can be required for all labs to use for parentage comparisons. They are working on that. . . but it isn't established yet. Do you have any idea what a nightmare it would be for one lab to try to compare to another lab without a standard panel of markers identified and implemented? Do you think for a minute that the SNPS panels would be identical among the three main labs currently testing Dexters so that there would be no issues in comparisions for parentage? Remember. . . this issue is not about dairy traits or carcass traits or tenderness. .. the issue is parentage confirmation.

Another factor that should be considered carefully is Dexters are NOT a commercial breed. SNPS provides the ability for financially viable tests that give commercial breeders information to make economic breeding and marketing decisions based on tests designed to meet this purpose. It just isn't a technology we need in the Dexter breed. Microsatellites are capable of fulfilling every general Dexter requirement and if a random breeder here or there wishes to know if they have a tenderness gene in their bull and they are willing to pay for a test that may or may not give a breed specific answer than let them go to commercial outlets where that is available. Dexter owners in general are struggling to afford important tests in their herds and being small farms or hobby farms or homesteads they simply do not need nor will they likely make use of these types of tests.

Now for the BIG problem. Do you know how many genotypes are on file with ADCA? Legacy is nearing the middle of 1300-1400. Do you realize not a single one of these tests can be compared with SNPS? I was asked by the head of the UCD lab when told they would be willing to switch the testing to SNPS for Legacy, " but who is going to pay for the retests"? Who indeed? I'm not paying to retest my herd for a technology I simply do not need nor has anyone convinced me is needed in this breed. If you are hammering on a technology that is not necessary for the Dexter breed because you think it gives you the perfect "stall" and "excuse" not to DNA type or parentage confirm your herd that is one thing, but I absolutely don't want you to use that excuse to negate thousands and thousands of dollars of effort by those of us who felt it important and worthwhile for the ten years you have not. Read that again. . . . there are breeders whose effort numbers thousands and thousands of dollars who have always believed in the importance of validating our breed and now those of you who did not and would not. . . . . you want to make all that effort worthless? Your entire approach has been based on what Kirk wants and want Kirk thinks benefits Kirk, not reality based on what is in the best interest of the breed and other breeders. The Dexter breed does not need, nor will it in any way be enhanced by commercial SNPS testing.

So let's consider another factor. If there should come a time in the future when SNPS might or could be of any benefit within the Dexter breed, then perhaps it will be either scientifically or economically viable to convert without the scientific and economic disaster it would currently create.

Rezzful - I am willing to accept I completely misunderstood and you have made it clear now. I do want to commend both you and Rhonda for the courage to speak your concerns. I was the very first Dexter owner to DNA test my complete herd and to continue to DNA type every offsping and to encourage other Dexter owners to do the same. I was for it when others now pushing it for entirely different reasons were against it. I was for it before I was agin it! LOL ( Little tongue-in-cheek political jargon there). I am still for it, but I am against forcing it on the entire breed because I am fearful of losing more Dexters to drop out and some of our bloodlines can not sustain the loss. There IS a better way, and all the small breeders and homesteaders can count on Legacy to continue to look out for their interests because what is good for them is good for Dexters so Rhonda don't stress, if no one else has your back. . . Legacy will.

Judy Sponaugle