M-J-G
Member
It could be, cattle with our society are £27.50 for a parent verification, and £5 per test after that.
Performance recorded sheep.
- Thread starter CopperBeech
- Start date
M-J-G
Member
Not my breed, but here are the Hereford fees
www.herefordcattle.org
Testing categories - Hereford Cattle Society
www.herefordcattle.org
Recording just under 1000 outdoor lambing Romney’s,ye slightly more time consuming but ringing at the same time so no need for extra labour at say tailing.We hosted an EID for the technophobe-me that is- anyway over 10 years the lift in rearing % and the gain in Ave 8 week weight paid a dividend of something like 5x1 with the 1 being extra labour cost
Should add that’s not via DNA
Should add that’s not via DNA
Woolless
Member
- Location
- Berwickshire, Scottish Borders
I've heard from a couple of folk that had tried it on a decent size lamb crop, one a few years since and one recently, and it couldn't cope with that. Not enough differences in the DNA apparently. Would help if you knew the mother but then you're back to tagging
If you're a breeder then recording is your primary job ( some folk think recording gets in the way ---i think they are farmers not breeders)
I used to do 700 ewes with just pen and paper outside so with EID etc i find it easy
DNA analysis is growing with the use of higher density chips offering more than just parentage and a few gene markers
I used to do 700 ewes with just pen and paper outside so with EID etc i find it easy
DNA analysis is growing with the use of higher density chips offering more than just parentage and a few gene markers
- Location
- Fife
I thought DNA meant all the mother's had to be sequenced first?I've heard from a couple of folk that had tried it on a decent size lamb crop, one a few years since and one recently, and it couldn't cope with that. Not enough differences in the DNA apparently. Would help if you knew the mother but then you're back to tagging
Woolless
Member
- Location
- Berwickshire, Scottish Borders
Yes, I would think so. @Tim W will know more than me.
Of course---you need a base to be able to reference the lambs to
This is a one off setup cost of course
- Location
- Fife
Then after that it's 100% accurate?
That depends on the chip used. Sheep Ireland was using a 5k or 10k chip about 10 years ago and quite frankly it was quite useless. Think it is 50k they use now now and 100%.
It's my understanding that it also matters how the chip is designed so with the 50k chip you are looking at 50000 different points on the genome, but a lot of the genes will have very little variation, so it would be possible to design a 50k chip that was useless. Obviously you pick the genes with the most variation so then it works well
I think Campbell Tweed is recording 3000 easycares in one flock in Northern Ireland.Was having a discussion about the above. Would be curious to know what the largest flock / flocks of SIG / SIL recorded sheep in the UK are? In the sense of who, how many and what breed?
Biggest isn’t always better but when it comes to recording sheep, the more you record, I think the more meaningful the data ?
And really talking about sheep managed in same way by same folk in same place, rather than multiplier flocks. But would also be curious to know what size recorded flock some of those operations have.
Partly curious as am wondering if we may be being over ambitious
CopperBeech
Member
- Location
- A Welsh man lost in England
Still hoping for a few more answers to this one. I’m sure there are folk recording good sized flocks of sheep in a variety of settings. I would just like to talk to some of them about their experiences and the practicalities. But I need to find them first.
Woolless
Member
- Location
- Berwickshire, Scottish Borders
I think, not 100% sure that he properly records 'only' 600 ewes!
CopperBeech
Member
- Location
- A Welsh man lost in England
That’s what I’m finding. Quite a few bit recorded flocks but they only record 500-800 sort of thing, the rest are ‘commercial ewes’.
- Location
- Montgomeryshire
@Romney_Rob and @RobP would be recording biggish numbers outside wouldn’t they?
Once you’ve identified the better end of the ewe flock, can you not narrow them down to 600 ‘nucleus’ ewes and just record them? Rams can be tested over those well enough, once you’ve established those ewes’ individual performance, and any ‘new’ ewe genetics introduced can be thrown into the 600 and recorded alongside?
Is there any need to record a larger population?
- Location
- Fife
Ego
CopperBeech
Member
- Location
- A Welsh man lost in England
Yer that’s right it’s just pure ego
CopperBeech
Member
- Location
- A Welsh man lost in England
Recording 600 ewes is absolutely fine, but why wouldn’t you record 1200 if you could ?
600 ewes - 900 lambs - 450 males / 450 females. Top 10% males - 45 animals. Do 1200 and top 10% is 90 animals etx.
Also we wish to use a number of sires over 100 ewes each in order to give a meaningful number of lambs to record and compare off each. This necessitates more than 600 ewes.
We have recorded 600 ewes but now we would like to record more.
I just wanted to see what sort of numbers were actually being done, and by whom, and what their set up was and staffing levels etc.
It has little to do with ego despite @unlacedgecko suggestion.
This place is getting harder and harder to ask people practical questions about farming.
I would have thought that it would be pretty obvious that the more head you record, the better the data would be.
CopperBeech
Member
- Location
- A Welsh man lost in England
Apparently not. I’m just an egotistical b*stard