THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS AND POTENTIAL WHEN USING CURRENT AND FUTURE EPD

1
THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS AND POTENTIAL WHEN USING
CURRENT AND FUTURE EPD ECONOMICALLY RELEVANT
TRAITS

• R. Mark Enns and Dorian J. Garrick
• Department of Animal SciencesColorado State
  University

2
Beef Producers Motivation

• Hobby
• Property tax reduction
• Profit

3
Two basic tools of animal breeding

• Selection
• Mating

4
Expected Progeny Differences (EPD)

• Widely adopted by the industry
• Have increased from 5 to over 15

5
Typical Genetic Evaluation

• Birth Weight
• Weaning Weight
• Milk
• Total Maternal
• Yearling Weight

• Carcass Traits
• Calving Ease
• Mix of others

6
Sire Summary of the Future?
Feedlot feed consumption Feedlot surv. Pre-wean
surv. Serving capacity Serving proportion Semen
volume Hip height Leg score Length productive
life Doing ability Grand-maternal
weaning Twinning rate Days to 11mm BF Days to 75
Choice Days to carc wt. Hair whorl score Average
daily gain Wt. /day of age Liver weight Resting
heart rate Pulmonary arteriole pressure Brisket
disease rate Bravery Aggression

• Gestation length
• Days to calving
• Calving interval
• Stayability
• Heifer pregnancy rate
• Rebreeding rate
• Calf weaned/cow exposed
• Scrotal circumference
• Pelvic area
• Frame score
• Muscle score
• Udder score
• Docility
• Tick score
• Parasite egg count
• Mature weight
• Maintenance energy
• Feed efficiency
• Drop weight

• Birth direct
• Birth maternal
• Weaning direct
• Weaning maternal
• Total maternal
• Yearling direct
• 600 d direct
• Calving direct
• Calving maternal
• Carcass wt
• Rib fat
• Rump fat
• LMA
• Marb score
• Quality grade
• Retail yield
• Lbs (kg) retail yield
• Yield grade
• Us LMA

Information Overload
7
Typical Genetic Evaluation

• Proven
• Accepted
• Well-used
• Assumption
• More EPD allow us to better characterize the
  genetic potential of animals
• Should be able to make more profitable selection
  decisions
• But

8

• Proliferation of EPD
• Many EPD indirectly related to economic goals
• An ever-increasing list of traits
• Methods for using EPD to make financially sound
  selection decisions

9
Combining EPD for financially sound selection
decisions

• Selection index (Hazel, 1943)
• Has been successfully implemented

10
Landcorp Beef Breeding Objective
.53 Net income from surplus progeny .06 Net
income from cull cows L Slaughter weight of
surplus progeny (kg) DP Dressing percentage of
surplus progeny DM Dressing percentage of cull
cows F Fertility M Weight of cull cows at
disposal (kg)
1976 NZ Morris, Baker, and Johnson (1980)
11
Landcorp Selection Index
12
Genetic Trends
13
MacNeil, 2003 I YW -3.2BW
14
EPD and Profitability

• We can combine genetic evaluation to make
• Genetic progress in multiple traits
  simultaneously
• Increase profitability

15
Current options

• Stay with the status quo
• Develop an index
• Focus selection on economically relevant traits

16
Terminology

• Economically Relevant Traits traits that are
  directly associated with a revenue stream or cost
  of production of a commercial operation.

17
Indicator Traits traits that add accuracy to
the prediction of ERT by pleiotropy (e.g. genetic
correlation).
18
ERT

• Does selecting on an indicator directly effect
  your income or cost?

19
Economically RelevantProbability Of Calving Ease

• Indicators
• Birth Weight
• Pelvic Area
• Gestation Length
• Calving Ease Score
• ?

20
Conceptually

• Sire A
• Average birth weight of calves is 80 pounds
• Sire B
• Average birth weight of calves is 90 pounds
• Is there a difference, if all offspring are born
  unassisted?
• How do we make sense of these EPD to increase
  profitability?

21
Option 1 Status quo

• Use perceived value to make selection decisions
• Pros
• Easiest
• Cons
• Least accurate method

22
Option 2 Develop an index

• Pros
• Proven
• Cons
• Detailed information on costs and incomes
  required
• Correct enterprise allocation
• May require services of a consultant

23
Option 3 Focus on Economically Relevant Traits

• Pros
• One of easiest to implement at the outset
• Cons
• Not all EPD on ERT are available yet
• Requires knowledge of costs and incomes of
  production

24
Option 3 Levels of Complexity

• Focus on the EPD for the ERT
• Add in knowledge of costs and incomes of
  production to form your producer specific index

25

• What is the value difference in the following two
  bulls
• Bull A WW EPD 16
• Bull B WW EPD 32
• Difference 16 pounds in EPD
• Price is 1.05 per pound
• 16 1.05 16.80
• Assume we will keep replacements for a 400 cow
  herd

26
(No Transcript)
27
Result

• Justifies EPDs related to feed costs
• Maintenance feed requirements (CSU)
• Feed for production (days to finish CSU)
• Residual feed intake
• These are economically relevant traits (ERT) in
  addition to WW

28
Another Example
Bull ID Stayability EPD
Charlie 19
Delta 0
What is the difference in value of these bulls?
29
Stayability example
30
(No Transcript)
31
Our desire is that producers use EPDs objectively
in the context of their business goal(s)

• Profit Income Expense

32
Current options

• Stay with the status quo
• Develop an index
• Focus selection on economically relevant traits

33
Coordinated effort

• Colorado State University
• Cornell University
• University of Georgia

• Congressional Special Grant
• Develop and implement improved methodologies and
  technologies for genetic evaluation of beef
  cattle to maximize the impact genetic programs
  have on the economic viability, international
  competitiveness, and sustainability of U.S. beef
  cattle producers and to provide consumers with
  affordable and healthy beef products