Another EBV thread

[Ysgythan]

How can he possibly be a good ram if he isn’t very pretty? [emoji848]

well quite

 

[Ysgythan]

That is an awful photo, all it tells anyone is that it's a bad photo.

I’m worried he may have a rupture, it’s that bad.

 

[M-J-G]

A lot of people get carried away with overall index.
It is a mistake IMO as many animals with a high overall index aren't desirable in some traits, and I'd prefer to decide the importance of traits myself.

 

[spark_28]

sorry to go off topic slightlty but is 'very fat' on fat depth really a problem?

 

[Ysgythan]

A lot of people get carried away with overall index.
It is a mistake IMO as many animals with a high overall index aren't desirable in some traits, and I'd prefer to decide the importance of traits myself.

So should there be an overall index at all? And should we not move to a proofing and linear assessment model more akin to dairy bulls?

 

[Ysgythan]

sorry to go off topic slightlty but is 'very fat' on fat depth really a problem?

not for me, but @neilo thinks I’m too hung up on positive fat.

 

[neilo]

A lot of people get carried away with overall index.
It is a mistake IMO as many animals with a high overall index aren't desirable in some traits, and I'd prefer to decide the importance of traits myself.

I've always argued that, and only really look at trait ebvs myself. I've always been told that doing so makes it too complicated though, and we need to present a simplified message.

It could be worse, it might just be put into a really simplified star system as Sheep Ireland have, where you don't even get an overall index, you just get them presented as being in a 20% wide band...

 

[neilo]

sorry to go off topic slightlty but is 'very fat' on fat depth really a problem?

Yes, it's as bad as having a very low fat ebv. 'Very fat' means that his progeny will hit finished fat class at a lighter weight, and would go overfat more easily as he went heavier.

I would personally avoid anything that was extreme either way, unless I was looking at a specific animal to correct a breeding line and bring it back to the middle ground. Although there are obviously 'curve benders', there is a very strong correlation between a positive fat ebv and poorer muscling, and very rare to find an animal that excels on muscle traits as well as a high positive fat IME.

 

[neilo]

So should there be an overall index at all? And should we not move to a proofing and linear assessment model more akin to dairy bulls?

How would you suggest doing linear assessment on a woolly animal, where the appearance would vary according to how it had been fed, and who had been doing the feeding?

We attempted just such a thing prior to our breed Premier Sale for a few years, instead of having a show. 'Breed Evaluation' did work, to a degree, but a panel of (about 20?) of us had several practice sessions a year to get it working and relatively repeatable, and it still took many hours before the sale to do the (approx) 200 rams entered. There was pressure from the showing fraternity from the outset, and they eventually won over.
To do it on a larger scale, as would be needed for a proper genetic evaluation like dairy cows do, would entail huge expense and numbers of evaluators, running around the country to do progeny groups in varying management systems.

Type classification in the dairy industry runs alongside performance recording, not instead of. Too much emphasis on type tends to lead to pretty cows that don't produce, whereas too much emphasis on production traits alone (PIN anyone?) selected cows that fell off the wagon at a young age.

 

[neilo]

Just for you @Ysgythan , a photo of this year's highest index Charollais ram lamb, taken this morning.
Whilst certainly not perfect, I’m happy enough with his ‘type’.

It's the one with the blue dot, not the Highlander behind.

His overall index is 463, with the top 1% being around 330 iirc.

AnimalDetails | Signet Breeding

signetdata.com

 

[Ysgythan]

How would you suggest doing linear assessment on a woolly animal, where the appearance would vary according to how it had been fed, and who had been doing the feeding?

We attempted just such a thing prior to our breed Premier Sale for a few years, instead of having a show. 'Breed Evaluation' did work, to a degree, but a panel of (about 20?) of us had several practice sessions a year to get it working and relatively repeatable, and it still took many hours before the sale to do the (approx) 200 rams entered. There was pressure from the showing fraternity from the outset, and they eventually won over.
To do it on a larger scale, as would be needed for a proper genetic evaluation like dairy cows do, would entail huge expense and numbers of evaluators, running around the country to do progeny groups in varying management systems.

Type classification in the dairy industry runs alongside performance recording, not instead of. Too much emphasis on type tends to lead to pretty cows that don't produce, whereas too much emphasis on production traits alone (PIN anyone?) selected cows that fell off the wagon at a young age.

the Dutch manage it.

 

[Ysgythan]

Just for you @Ysgythan , a photo of this year's highest index Charollais ram lamb, taken this morning.
Whilst certainly not perfect, I’m happy enough with his ‘type’.

It's the one with the blue dot, not the Highlander behind.

View attachment 911865

His overall index is 463, with the top 1% being around 330 iirc.

AnimalDetails | Signet Breeding

signetdata.com

At least he’s “charolais-y”

 

[spark_28]

not for me, but @neilo thinks I’m too hung up on positive fat.

Yes, it's as bad as having a very low fat ebv. 'Very fat' means that his progeny will hit finished fat class at a lighter weight, and would go overfat more easily as he went heavier.

I would personally avoid anything that was extreme either way, unless I was looking at a specific animal to correct a breeding line and bring it back to the middle ground. Although there are obviously 'curve benders', there is a very strong correlation between a positive fat ebv and poorer muscling, and very rare to find an animal that excels on muscle traits as well as a high positive fat IME.

what if you sell your lambs store in the ring

 

[noagain]

Yes, it's as bad as having a very low fat ebv. 'Very fat' means that his progeny will hit finished fat class at a lighter weight, and would go overfat more easily as he went heavier.

I would personally avoid anything that was extreme either way, unless I was looking at a specific animal to correct a breeding line and bring it back to the middle ground. Although there are obviously 'curve benders', there is a very strong correlation between a positive fat ebv and poorer muscling, and very rare to find an animal that excels on muscle traits as well as a high positive fat IME.

Are positive fat females not ment to milk better?

 

[Tim W]

Are positive fat females not ment to milk better?

+tive fat EBV females should produce lambs with more fat than average
+tive Maternal EBV females should produce milkier ewe lambs

 

[neilo]

what if you sell your lambs store in the ring

I’ve no idea, it’s not something I’ve ever done. If I was buying though, I would want a lamb that showed some potential to grow, not one that was fat in the low 30kgs (I’m only thinking in terms of lowland stores, and appreciate hill breeds will be a different market completely).

 

[neilo]

Are positive fat females not ment to milk better?

It would stand to reason that an adult ewe with a high BCS would have better reserves to mobilise for milk production, but whether that has any connection to subcutaneous fat levels at slaughter weight (as is measured/assessed for the ‘fat depth‘ ebv), I have no idea. I think they’ve done that work for the hill breed analysis, but I’ve not followed it.

IME though, high fat ebv sheep certainly don’t necessarily milk better than low fat ebv sheep. It is just an estimate of their fat level at slaughter weights.

 

[sheepwise]

Yes, it's as bad as having a very low fat ebv. 'Very fat' means that his progeny will hit finished fat class at a lighter weight, and would go overfat more easily as he went heavier.

I would personally avoid anything that was extreme either way, unless I was looking at a specific animal to correct a breeding line and bring it back to the middle ground. Although there are obviously 'curve benders', there is a very strong correlation between a positive fat ebv and poorer muscling, and very rare to find an animal that excels on muscle traits as well as a high positive fat IME.

Makes sense as tups with good hard fleshing are obviously leaner with more muscle and definitely produce the best grading lambs.

 

[Nithsdale]

At least he’s “charolais-y”

Is that a polite way of saying ugly

 

[clod hopper]

So should there be an overall index at all? And should we not move to a proofing and linear assessment model more akin to dairy bulls?

I agree, but big cost factor sadly