ebv debate

[neilo]

,
nearly all our main line sires are homebred and have been for 25 years , we use purchased new genetics on the sh ewes , and the best recorded sons used over the main flock within family groups ,for the next 4/5 years , its the only way you can magnify the best of your own genetics , and limit the influence of any problems the new ram WILL bring in , new sires are then sold within a few years unless they contribute nearly all good genes and very few poor ones .

That's not dissimilar to what I do. I have a lot more confidence in my home bred sires, not because of any doubts on Signet ebvs, but because I know what my selection is like on other traits that I consider important (feet, udders, etc). Whilst I know that a lot of the pedigree flocks in this country are run as hobby flocks, with regular foot trimming to 'keep everything right', where entropion 'isn't a problem as it's treated', where lambing pens each have a heat lamp to keep the shepherd warm when everything gets tubed, and where big teats just mean the ewe has to be milked out for a few days before the lamb suckles himself, I treat other people's genetics with a healthy cynicism.

 

[Ysgythan]

Nothing wrong with healthy cynicism. If EBVs were promoted on the basis you set out there it would be better. It's this quasi-religious zeal about them I'm uncomfortable with.

 

[M-J-G]

Too small? There is an over supply of bulls in almost every breed.

Perhaps the excess of pedigree animals that are from the over supply, could have their slaughter information fed directly into the BLUP system thus still playing their part in the linking the commercial and pedigree world's.

And before anyone says it, plenty of high EBV animals end up on the hook because they are undesirable for breeding. These could be the first step in linking these and perhaps the commercial animals on a farm where commercial stock are also farmed as well,as quantification of how the EBV of an animal rates against how it actually hangs up.

 

[andybk]

Nothing wrong with healthy cynicism. If EBVs were promoted on the basis you set out there it would be better. It's this quasi-religious zeal about them I'm uncomfortable with.

with that we can agree ,
i think most of the problem is the main core of terminal breeders arnt over committed to the scheme , ie trying to do the show / sale type stuff alongside signet recording , (sorry guys they are different sheep in the main !) , with-in the charollais you could probably count on one hand those that embrace it fully without much compromise , and thats going to have a big impact on the finished article .
Just a few years ago our news letter had a big spread about one breeder who was very low down on the recorded figures , who bought a very high index ram , headlines proudly proclaiming he won a prize for the biggest jump in overall indexes , but that would have only been down to the ram , he still had the same ewes , and his customers were essentially buying very similar genetics to before ,
As stated by tim earlier in the thread some use it as a marketing tool ,and dont really care where their headed , which is where many of the bad results come from out in the commercial world ,ie commercial men buying on an overall index because thats what the partially ignorant boss or estate manager has told his shepherd to do , advised in the first place by signet at some open day or news letter . As you say a quasi-religious zeal thats never questioned for fear of looking stupid , Emperor's new clothes and all that .

 

[Dafydd]

Perhaps the excess of pedigree animals that are from the over supply, could have their slaughter information fed directly into the BLUP system thus still playing their part in the linking the commercial and pedigree world's.

And before anyone says it, plenty of high EBV animals end up on the hook because they are undesirable for breeding. These could be the first step in linking these and perhaps the commercial animals on a farm where commercial stock are also farmed as well,as quantification of how the EBV of an animal rates against how it actually hangs up.

I mentioned to a council member that slaughter sheets (from pedigree animals) should be part of the blup, he did say he was going to raise it at the next council meeting.

 

[Jackson4]

If quasi religious zeal is what your really worried about then i think youve wasted your time with all this arguing, in fact until this thread started ebv's have hardly been discussed at all on this forum by anyone, so if you've found some proselyting religous zealot about them it cant have been on here.
They are poorly understood by nearly all but who use them for breeding ie the way accuracy is measure % wise, whats recorded and why, what the estimating and statistics mean etc. And if the ff seems to attract the more open minded farmer then it should be covered more. At least the people on here dont seem to think that expense= best performing animal, and so we dont get many threads saying 'what a fantastic animal it was bought for 120000 guinea's'. It may or may not be a good animal but without data on how it performed in comparison then we wont know. And with the way the show scene works ie more minded to looks than actual living performance then alot of farmers are right to not exult them.

Im sure alot of breeders who breed using ebv's have the same poor commercial traits in there sheep which blight sheep breeding to date, there are more economic traits than just muscle, fat, growth etc what about.. feet and function, longevity and vigour, teeth, pelvic width, ability to perform on grass with an unassisted philosophy etc? but this doesnt mean ebv's cant be a usefull tool to breeding, just means our philosophy is a bit stuck in the past. No sfp and 2000 ewes per labour unit and i guarantee the philosophy would change from farmers and breeders.

 

[Ysgythan]

It's been that before. Subsidy is less than a century old. The show ring excesses developed not long after a he showeing itself in the 18th Century.

 

[M-J-G]

I mentioned to a council member that slaughter sheets (from pedigree animals) should be part of the blup, he did say he was going to raise it at the next council meeting.

There would be a wise move, from a breed society that I wouldn't expect it from, so I'll be interested to see if it happens.

I would be prepared to support that policy, and possibly kill breeding quality bulls if it were going to allow a gateway to monitoring commercial stock as a comparison.

That's possibly how sheep will be able to draw up a link too, it would just need a cross section of pedigrees across all breeds with EBVs to be slaughtered for data collection and links made.

EBV's might have a future after all.

 

[Dafydd]

There would be a wise move, from a breed society that I wouldn't expect it from, so I'll be interested to see if it happens.

I would be prepared to support that policy, and possibly kill breeding quality bulls if it were going to allow a gateway to monitoring commercial stock as a comparison.

That's possibly how sheep will be able to draw up a link too, it would just need a cross section of pedigrees across all breeds with EBVs to be slaughtered for data collection and links made.

EBV's might have a future after all.

I'm not sure they will take any notice though!

 

[Jackson4]

you can show off your money in anyway you like, a rich industrialist buying breeding cattle 200 years ago, or a oil rich tycoon buying a lamborgini etc but like in pig and poultry were margins are tight and not as propped up by sfp they have voted with their feet for genetics.

 

[neilo]

There would be a wise move, from a breed society that I wouldn't expect it from, so I'll be interested to see if it happens.

I would be prepared to support that policy, and possibly kill breeding quality bulls if it were going to allow a gateway to monitoring commercial stock as a comparison.

That's possibly how sheep will be able to draw up a link too, it would just need a cross section of pedigrees across all breeds with EBVs to be slaughtered for data collection and links made.

EBV's might have a future after all.

That's what's going to happen with the RamCompare project.

 

[M-J-G]

That's what's going to happen with the RamCompare project.

The slaughtering of recorded pure stock to validate EBVs may not achieve a great deal on its own, but it could be a fantastic link in taking EBV's to the coalface and allowing commercial input, and to take sole input away from pedigree breeders. Perhaps a useful transition.

 

[Global ovine]

I mentioned to a council member that slaughter sheets (from pedigree animals) should be part of the blup, he did say he was going to raise it at the next council meeting.

FYI
Culled sheep from any breed in NZ that are slaughtered at Alliance Group plants and individually assessed by Viascan for carcass region components (Shoulder, loin and leg meat yields) can have those data sent directly to SIL (NZ's Signet equivalent) to be added to the prescribed data collected (live weights, ultrasound and CT scans) to greatly boost the accuracy of all traits they include.
In my own case with 2 breeds; total of 11 sires used per year, average number of lambs weaned per sire last year 93, 40% of lambs culled on faults and mainly eBVs/indexes were slaughtered. This resulted in almost 100% of progeny being measured, with large numbers directly on commercial worth using technology that can be used for both carcass payment and adding to the performance recording programme. It can be done and is being done for both sheep and cattle. Surely with some lobbying, it could also be achieved in the UK if Viascan or Xray carcass component measuring technology was installed.
Ram Compare (similar to the NZ and Irish Central Progeny Test use such technology) to assess these traits. Although CPT flocks are a huge step forward for national improvement of species by traits, they depend entirely upon breeders being linked into the CPT. Gathering individual carcass component data from culled animals does not have to involve strong linkages, but adds much to gaining information accuracy and acceptance by the ram and bull buying public.

 

[CharcoalWally]

I've been talking to a few SAC consultants over the last couple of days , and it would appear that there might be a little sympathy higher up the chain with those of us who believe that data should be concentrated much more heavily from commercially farmed livestock , and less focus on pedigree animals only . There seems to be a stream of thought , similar to views expressed on here , that the current system is simply not delivering enough information , and that change can , and should , be made.
Ok , there's nothing set in stone yet and these are just early murmurs , but it's the first sign I've seen that there might be even a hint of change of focus.
You never know , watch this space indeed.

 

[M-J-G]

I've been talking to a few SAC consultants over the last couple of days , and it would appear that there might be a little sympathy higher up the chain with those of us who believe that data should be concentrated much more heavily from commercially farmed livestock , and less focus on pedigree animals only . There seems to be a stream of thought , similar to views expressed on here , that the current system is simply not delivering enough information , and that change can , and should , be made.
Ok , there's nothing set in stone yet and these are just early murmurs , but it's the first sign I've seen that there might be even a hint of change of focus.
You never know , watch this space indeed.

Shame it has taken 30+ years for the murmurs to start.

Maybe in another 3 decades time we might get commercial progeny data and comparisons across breeds, rather that breed specific, pedigree only data.

 

[M-J-G]

FYI
Culled sheep from any breed in NZ that are slaughtered at Alliance Group plants and individually assessed by Viascan for carcass region components (Shoulder, loin and leg meat yields) can have those data sent directly to SIL (NZ's Signet equivalent) to be added to the prescribed data collected (live weights, ultrasound and CT scans) to greatly boost the accuracy of all traits they include.
In my own case with 2 breeds; total of 11 sires used per year, average number of lambs weaned per sire last year 93, 40% of lambs culled on faults and mainly eBVs/indexes were slaughtered. This resulted in almost 100% of progeny being measured, with large numbers directly on commercial worth using technology that can be used for both carcass payment and adding to the performance recording programme. It can be done and is being done for both sheep and cattle. Surely with some lobbying, it could also be achieved in the UK if Viascan or Xray carcass component measuring technology was installed.
Ram Compare (similar to the NZ and Irish Central Progeny Test use such technology) to assess these traits. Although CPT flocks are a huge step forward for national improvement of species by traits, they depend entirely upon breeders being linked into the CPT. Gathering individual carcass component data from culled animals does not have to involve strong linkages, but adds much to gaining information accuracy and acceptance by the ram and bull buying public.

The UK seems to be lagging behind again. I wish I was shocked!

 

[andybk]

smal

I've been talking to a few SAC consultants over the last couple of days , and it would appear that there might be a little sympathy higher up the chain with those of us who believe that data should be concentrated much more heavily from commercially farmed livestock , and less focus on pedigree animals only . There seems to be a stream of thought , similar to views expressed on here , that the current system is simply not delivering enough information , and that change can , and should , be made.
Ok , there's nothing set in stone yet and these are just early murmurs , but it's the first sign I've seen that there might be even a hint of change of focus.
You never know , watch this space indeed.

small acorns and all that ,really good news , they might find they get a bigger membership if the data is more commercially based , there is lots of us like the concept ,

 

[neilo]

The slaughtering of recorded pure stock to validate EBVs may not achieve a great deal on its own, but it could be a fantastic link in taking EBV's to the coalface and allowing commercial input, and to take sole input away from pedigree breeders. Perhaps a useful transition.

Sorry, that's what I meant. Lambs from recorded rams, from various different bloodlines, will be bred from several different commercial females breeds, on several farms in several parts of the country and over different seasons and rearing systems. The resultant lambs are going to be scanned & recorded right through to final slaughter.

 

[Joe]

That's what's going to happen with the RamCompare project.

Wait for the negativity when cross breed ebv's are mentioned. Push here for SI to release the data they already have available, what I have heard certain maternal breed is coming out on top in initial terminal reports.
As a bit of a maths geek I believe accuracy on the data is very low on cross breed analysis and therefore level of data available on each breed will hugely distort the information until that is balanced out. If you got a scenario here were 100% of one breeds information is available and 30% of another, going to have results such as this.
What breeders and to a lesser extent farmers will say is - waste of time this recording sure we all know the information available is wrong.

 

[Ysgythan]

More and more convinced that it should be all or nothing. This should not be for individual farmers to decide. If it needs to be population wide to be effective then the levy should pay for it or it should be compulsory.