• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Identifying Grass Sires w/Ultrasound

P

PureCountry

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 25, 2005
Messages
2,684
Location
Edgewood, BC, moving to Hardisty, AB
I'm curious to know if anyone has experience identifying grass sires using ultrasound data. Some interesting conversation came about at our bull sale on Saturday, and opinions varied greatly. One fella was of the opinion that if a bull has a really high marbling score and alot of backfat, he's obviously going to be an animal that can finish and grade well on grass. Another was of the opinion that if they truly are a grass animal, they should have lower backfat, and higher marbling.

Any thoughts and opinions? I realize of course that we must keep lean meat yield in our sights, as well as Ribeye per cwt.
 
Well one of your former customers and newest customers actually killed a group of steers directly off grass and got them government graded-this was before marbling was a component of the grading system up here but they all graded under the old standards. It would be interesting to ultrasound your bulls right off grass before they go on silage for the winter and see if they change in ranking etc. The best way to identify grass genetics is with grass. Personally I'd tend to lean towards an animal that can lay on fat and marbling kind of in unison-their marbling score being similar to their bf cover-ex. a 5 for marbling and a 5 for bf. There is a breed that is famous for high marbling scores and not much bf-it's called a Jersey followed closely by a Wagyou. it might be old school but a cowherd that can lay on some bf for winter usually gets through winter alot better. In the Angus breed some of the marbling giants leave daughters that are pretty darn frail.
 
We had a lengthy discussion about this at a bull test meeting with some BIF advisors and researchers that were unified in the consensus that bulls that do well on feed will also do well on grass, and vice versa.

They were of the frame of mind that "Efficiency" testing will sort out the ones that will do well on either/or.

I have sent bulls to both forage tests and the grain eating contests.
The same bloodlines in mine that do well on one always does well on the other.

They were saying that the metabolical and biological efficiencies are the very same characteristics in both forage and grain fed bulls.

From looking at data from the forage tests I have participated in, the ultrasound data, marbling-backfat, does not help identify the highest gainers.........which would obviously be the most efficient foragers.
 
That's interesting Mike, but I think in developing grass genetics, we can't forget marbling. We have to have animals that marble while they're gaining, since the biggest argument against grass-finished beef is it's taste/flavor. If it's an animal that gains well, and marbles very well, we should have a critter that's not only economical to raise, but produces a very tasty end product, shouldn't we? That's my opinion/best guess. :D In other words, I agree with Northern. Good gain+good backfat+good marbling = good grass genetics.
 
rainie said:
I agree with feed efficiency testing Mike. I don't agree with the high gaining animal on grain being the high gaining animal on grass.
Click to expand...

Not being testy, but could you give me some specific biological reasons for your skepticism?
 
Seen way too many high gaining bulls come off test and then melt to nothing while on grass during the summer,whether they see a cow or not. Not to be testy but hasn't this topic been cussed and discussed on here before.
 
rainie said:
Seen way too many high gaining bulls come off test and then melt to nothing while on grass during the summer,whether they see a cow or not. Not to be testy but hasn't this topic been cussed and discussed on here before.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, I've seen bulls come off forage tests fat and sassy and dwindle down during summer too.



Glad you were so very specific...................................
 
Northern Rancher said:
Well one of your former customers and newest customers actually killed a group of steers directly off grass and got them government graded-this was before marbling was a component of the grading system up here but they all graded under the old standards. It would be interesting to ultrasound your bulls right off grass before they go on silage for the winter and see if they change in ranking etc. The best way to identify grass genetics is with grass. Personally I'd tend to lean towards an animal that can lay on fat and marbling kind of in unison-their marbling score being similar to their bf cover-ex. a 5 for marbling and a 5 for bf. There is a breed that is famous for high marbling scores and not much bf-it's called a Jersey followed closely by a Wagyou. it might be old school but a cowherd that can lay on some bf for winter usually gets through winter alot better. In the Angus breed some of the marbling giants leave daughters that are pretty darn frail.
Click to expand...


You hit the nail on the heard NR with the comment "In the Angus breed some of the marbling giants leave daughters that are pretty darn frail."

I see so many pictures of cows that have high ratios and not only for marbling but milk and weaning, except they don't look like they could survive a Big Muddy summer little lone the winter.
 
Why should they lose weight coming off forage test while on summer pasture Mike? Think the problem here is that we live in different climates.
 
PureCountry said:
I'm curious to know if anyone has experience identifying grass sires using ultrasound data. Some interesting conversation came about at our bull sale on Saturday, and opinions varied greatly. One fella was of the opinion that if a bull has a really high marbling score and alot of backfat, he's obviously going to be an animal that can finish and grade well on grass. Another was of the opinion that if they truly are a grass animal, they should have lower backfat, and higher marbling.

Any thoughts and opinions? I realize of course that we must keep lean meat yield in our sights, as well as Ribeye per cwt.
Click to expand...

Was this discussion about bulls raised and finished on forage or about how to select a bull for grass finishing from bulls finished on grain?

Mike said:
Not being testy, but could you give me some specific biological reasons for your skepticism?
Click to expand...

How about the chemical difference between forage and grain(cellulose and starch) and how the animals digestive system responds to those differences through their endocrine and nervous systems? I would have liked to have heard the discussion with the BIF folks.

I think a lot depends on how the cows are raised...unpampered cows raised on forage only should produce bulls that should work on forage or grain.
 
Robertmac, The largest difference, as was explained to me, between grain and forage efficient animals was the ability of one animal over another to produce either cellulose or starch digesting bacteria in the rumen as needed, but those bacteria can be fed to an animal now instead of waiting for the bacteria to develop naturally.

Overall appetite, which is controlled by Leptin production, has a big say in how an animal gains is a factor also.
 
But the bacteria doesn't change the chemical makeup of the feed, but the need for a different bacteria confirms that chemical difference. There is more to digestion than the rumen, isn't it. Just as a high carb diet causes changes in human metabolism, it also causes changes in cattle metabolism. I think we are going to agree that bull test are more about appetite and the ability to utilize macro-nutrients than about subtle genetic differences. That is why I am focused on the long term abilities of the cow where the subtle differences are more likely to surface. Reproduction is a better indicator...a cow with borderline genetics and endocrine system will shut down reproduction in order to survive...the cow in the same herd that maintains BCS and raises a good calf has the better endocrine system to match that environment.

It kinda like the chicken and egg argument...which came first, the good bull or the cow that produced him????
 
RobertMac said:
PureCountry said:
I'm curious to know if anyone has experience identifying grass sires using ultrasound data. Some interesting conversation came about at our bull sale on Saturday, and opinions varied greatly. One fella was of the opinion that if a bull has a really high marbling score and alot of backfat, he's obviously going to be an animal that can finish and grade well on grass. Another was of the opinion that if they truly are a grass animal, they should have lower backfat, and higher marbling.

Any thoughts and opinions? I realize of course that we must keep lean meat yield in our sights, as well as Ribeye per cwt.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Was this discussion about bulls raised and finished on forage or about how to select a bull for grass finishing from bulls finished on grain?

Robertmac, I was thinking how do you select a bull that will sire calves that will gain well on forage alone. The bull himself may be grain or grass fed, but I'm talking specifically about carcass data, how do you use that data to identify those bulls? My feeling is that you can actually find bulls that do it, even if they came from a grain-fed environment, but cattle that have been forage raised for several generations will be more likely to throw the trait, and do it consistently.JMO
 
But the bacteria doesn't change the chemical makeup of the feed,
Click to expand...

It does changes the chemical composition of feed when inside the digestive tract. By altering N and ammonia production especially.

There is another phenomenon called "heat production" in cattle which is correlated to efficiency also. The less "Heat" generated by an animal, the more efficient they will be. Studies using thermal photography are confirming this at this time.

There are probably more numerous biological and metabolic happenings concerning efficiency than we could imagine. Endocrinal, thyroid, pituitary, internal organ size, saliva production, etc.

What these guys were saying was.... that an animal that has the attributes to be efficient on grain are more predisposed to have the same characteristics that it takes to digest fiber more efficiently. And vice versa.

It's hard for me to argue with them with my limited knowledge of these functions.
 
Mike, I have to admit that I can see the wisdom in that theory. It just makes sense I think. An animal that can do well on one type of feed, should do well on anything. In very basic terms, compare it to a 90 yr old great grandfather who smoked since he was 12, drank like a fish, ate whatever he felt like(or had available), and never got cancer, diabetes, leukemia, MS, or had a heart attack. If my great grandfather had been a bull, he'd be awfully efficient, in my system, Robertmac's, or Mike's. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Purecountry; Perhaps you might be better to leptin test & identify the cattle that have the genes to lay down the fat cover........quite often these are the cattle that grade higher for IMF. The test only requires a hair sample at a cost of $15.00 per head; easy & available to anyone! Ultrasounding is great but can be a hassle to schedule timing and technician travel costs can make it unaffordable for smaller producers or those that live in remote areas.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top