M-J-G
Member
It could be, cattle with our society are £27.50 for a parent verification, and £5 per test after that.I’ve got it in my mind that sheep dna parentage alone is around £17-20, would that be right I wonder?
It could be, cattle with our society are £27.50 for a parent verification, and £5 per test after that.I’ve got it in my mind that sheep dna parentage alone is around £17-20, would that be right I wonder?
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 taggingI understood DNA being able to give full parentage and confirm the presence of specific genes.
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
Yes, I would think so. @Tim W will know more than me.I thought DNA meant all the mother's had to be sequenced first?
Of course---you need a base to be able to reference the lambs toYes, I would think so. @Tim W will know more than me.
Then after that it's 100% accurate?Of course---you need a base to be able to reference the lambs to
This is a one off setup cost of course
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%.Then after that it's 100% accurate?
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
I think, not 100% sure that he properly records 'only' 600 ewes!I think Campbell Tweed is recording 3000 easycares in one flock in Northern Ireland.
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’.I think, not 100% sure that he properly records 'only' 600 ewes!
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’.
@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?
Yer that’s right it’s just pure ego
Recording 600 ewes is absolutely fine, but why wouldn’t you record 1200 if you could ?@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?
I would have thought that it would be pretty obvious that the more head you record, the better the data would be.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.
Apparently not. I’m just an egotistical b*stardI would have thought that it would be pretty obvious that the more head you record, the better the data would be.