Pelvic measure.

[Overrun]

Looking at keeping some Angus and limousin bulling heifers back this year.

We've never pelvic measured before, but would like to know is it worth the expense and does it reduce calving problems?

Tia

 

[Farmer Fin]

Yes and yes.

 

[Bury the Trash]

Bit fidlier to do to say the least but ewe lambs at a certain age / weight measured would be a very useful tool ..

Has anyone even ever done sheep ? I wonder

 

[Overrun]

Yes and yes.

Any surprises amongst your results?

 

[Farmer Fin]

Any surprises amongst your results?

I did them as the vet at the same time as scoring their repro tract. Never had anyone stop doing it as they all said they had less issues. You always got the odd one with a really small pelvis or deformed and the odd freemartin or some that hadn’t started cycling yet.

 

[welger]

We are going to start had two c section s on heifers in 6 weeks. Both had very narrow pelvis

 

[Global ovine]

Bit fidlier to do to say the least but ewe lambs at a certain age / weight measured would be a very useful tool ..

Has anyone even ever done sheep ? I wonder

Yes. Forty one years ago in a research project. I directly measured pelvic aperture in slaughtered ewes from several lines of Romneys (from show bred traditional to performance selected from the world's first group breeding scheme) and found a 19.8% difference in aperture area mainly associated with width. I tried to use a scanner, but the only scanner available then was a Delphi, quite inadequate to measure much field depth and a very narrow field of vision. The rectal probe was also a prototype and more suited to a cows rectum than for a ewe.

Today's technology advances would enable such a useful tool to be developed and used as a selection tool in ewes lambs. However demand may only be in those countries where functionality has deteriorated because of other breeding goals. Sheep studs in NZ hugely reduced the dystocia problem by the shepherd inserting a fist into the offending ewe that needed assistance. If the pelvis was tight or prevented further insertion of the fist the ewe and progeny were marked for culling. Many studs had the policy to cull all offenders regardless. Most flocks regained functionality over a decade, or about 3 sheep generations. Therefore I question the need for such a tool if there are genetics available for functionality to introduce, the taking a harder nosed attitude for culling offending individuals and breeders using the ample facilities in performance recording programmes which will rank especially sires and all other individuals on survival/assistance.

 

[unlacedgecko]

Yes. Forty one years ago in a research project. I directly measured pelvic aperture in slaughtered ewes from several lines of Romneys (from show bred traditional to performance selected from the world's first group breeding scheme) and found a 19.8% difference in aperture area mainly associated with width. I tried to use a scanner, but the only scanner available then was a Delphi, quite inadequate to measure much field depth and a very narrow field of vision. The rectal probe was also a prototype and more suited to a cows rectum than for a ewe.

Today's technology advances would enable such a useful tool to be developed and used as a selection tool in ewes lambs. However demand may only be in those countries where functionality has deteriorated because of other breeding goals. Sheep studs in NZ hugely reduced the dystocia problem by the shepherd inserting a fist into the offending ewe that needed assistance. If the pelvis was tight or prevented further insertion of the fist the ewe and progeny were marked for culling. Many studs had the policy to cull all offenders regardless. Most flocks regained functionality over a decade, or about 3 sheep generations. Therefore I question the need for such a tool if there are genetics available for functionality to introduce, the taking a harder nosed attitude for culling offending individuals and breeders using the ample facilities in performance recording programmes which will rank especially sires and all other individuals on survival/assistance.

Was just about to tag you.

Didn't realize you conducted measurements on slaughtered ewes. I naively assumed you did so on live animals.

I think lower value per unit of sheep, as well as potential to lamb ewe lambs, makes measurements less viable than cattle.

 

[Global ovine]

Looking at keeping some Angus and limousin bulling heifers back this year.

We've never pelvic measured before, but would like to know is it worth the expense and does it reduce calving problems?

Tia

The economics are for you to determine based on your income streams.
I expect pelvic aperture to have a similar effect on dystocia in cattle as it has in sheep, that being the largest effect. However many other things can contribute to difficulties requiring assistance such as gestation length (mainly governed by the sires genetics) affecting calf birth weight, cow feeding regime both in early and late pregnancy (calf birth weight and BCS of the dam) and the innate vigour of the calf from both parents.
For sellers of bulls, pelvic scanning can be a useful tool to make progress and give buyers some idea of what they are buying. However eBVs are available for calving ease, so its up to the buyer to find a trusted breeder to get this assurance from the performance data.

For the ease of production from commercial beef cows, I would wager that it would be cheaper to find bull breeders with good data and good rankings for Ease Of Calving and take advantage of the work they have done for their clients success.

 

[Bill the Bass]

The economics are for you to determine based on your income streams.
I expect pelvic aperture to have a similar effect on dystocia in cattle as it has in sheep, that being the largest effect. However many other things can contribute to difficulties requiring assistance such as gestation length (mainly governed by the sires genetics) affecting calf birth weight, cow feeding regime both in early and late pregnancy (calf birth weight and BCS of the dam) and the innate vigour of the calf from both parents.
For sellers of bulls, pelvic scanning can be a useful tool to make progress and give buyers some idea of what they are buying. However eBVs are available for calving ease, so its up to the buyer to find a trusted breeder to get this assurance from the performance data.

For the ease of production from commercial beef cows, I would wager that it would be cheaper to find bull breeders with good data and good rankings for Ease Of Calving and take advantage of the work they have done for their clients success.

I would only use pelvic measuring alongside other selection measures such as short gestation, low birth weight etc. Using it on its own would be a waste of money if your stock bull is known to go ten days over and throw calves consistently over 45 kgs.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe pelvic width is highly heritable so if the OP is retaining his own heifers for breeding with decent record keeping he will soon be able to select for it. For my herd, this is the compelling reason for doing it - we can build a better picture of the type of cow and herd we are aiming for knowing that we already select sires for low birth weight and short gestation.

 

[Global ovine]

I would only use pelvic measuring alongside other selection measures such as short gestation, low birth weight etc. Using it on its own would be a waste of money if your stock bull is known to go ten days over and throw calves consistently over 45 kgs.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe pelvic width is highly heritable so if the OP is retaining his own heifers for breeding with decent record keeping he will soon be able to select for it. For my herd, this is the compelling reason for doing it - we can build a better picture of the type of cow and herd we are aiming for knowing that we already select sires for low birth weight and short gestation.

Agreed, it is short sighted to only focus on one measured trait to fix a multi causal problem. Although pelvic aperture like all skeletal shape traits are highly heritable, it is a bigger contributor to calving difficulties. But the combo of as many traits involved the better.

 

[beardface]

Yes. Forty one years ago in a research project. I directly measured pelvic aperture in slaughtered ewes from several lines of Romneys (from show bred traditional to performance selected from the world's first group breeding scheme) and found a 19.8% difference in aperture area mainly associated with width. I tried to use a scanner, but the only scanner available then was a Delphi, quite inadequate to measure much field depth and a very narrow field of vision. The rectal probe was also a prototype and more suited to a cows rectum than for a ewe.

Today's technology advances would enable such a useful tool to be developed and used as a selection tool in ewes lambs. However demand may only be in those countries where functionality has deteriorated because of other breeding goals. Sheep studs in NZ hugely reduced the dystocia problem by the shepherd inserting a fist into the offending ewe that needed assistance. If the pelvis was tight or prevented further insertion of the fist the ewe and progeny were marked for culling. Many studs had the policy to cull all offenders regardless. Most flocks regained functionality over a decade, or about 3 sheep generations. Therefore I question the need for such a tool if there are genetics available for functionality to introduce, the taking a harder nosed attitude for culling offending individuals and breeders using the ample facilities in performance recording programmes which will rank especially sires and all other individuals on survival/assistance.

Always thought sheep fisting was a Welsh thing........