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

RFI tested Hereford bull

The FG is not a misprint. When I first saw that too, I thought it was a mistake and it was bad data. I talked to Montey Kerley at U of MO and he said the grow safe data doesn't show any abnormal feedings by this bull so I have to beleive it is accurate. I think it is amazing that he could gain so much on less than a lb of feed while a lot of other bulls needed 3 lbs of feed to gain less weight.
Click to expand...

One question I have had about these RFI tests is how do the evaluations take into account compensatory gain and/or normal growth spurts? Wouldn't those two things tend to skew the results a bit if they happened to occur while an animal is on test? I'm certain they have a means of standardizing things... does anyone know how it is done?
 
I too have several questions about how compensatory gain is taken into account?? If the bulls that go into this test are not on the same plain of nutrition the results are the results going to be correct?

Also how does it work if I send a bull calf that has not done very well on grass and his mother and then goes great guns on grain in a feed effiency test, have I now begun to select for animals that gain on grain, but don't do well on grass?? I breed him and get a cow herd that now requires high energy ration?? Don't get me wrong I think that breeding for efficiency that goes back to the cow herd is IMPORTANT, but wonder about the unintended results of this selection tool.

To me this test would tranlate into the cow herd better if it was a high roughage diet. Maybe it is and someone more knowledgable can explain how this all works??

I know in my own herd I have had genetics that do well on high energy, but completely fall about in my grass finishing herd.
 
Select/cull the cow herd for functional efficiency on the natural resources of your ranch with minimum inputs. Keep a bull/bulls out of the best cow/cows to breed in the functional efficiency for replacements. Calves from efficient cows should have no problem performing in the feedlot. IMO
 
If you want to buy cattle that do good on forage buy your genetics from an outfit that raises cattle that do well on forage-not a grain outfit who calves their late calvers in a horse paddock so they can have some forage bulls. It would be the wreck of the Hesperus if some of the 'name' breeders got rid of their feedbuckets and calving aids and turned their cows out to fend for themselves. It takes some selection not just turning the bulls out a couple months later. The two bulls that are up on the site both had pretty good weaning ratios so didn't go in skinny and then go to town.
 
One question I have had about these RFI tests is how do the evaluations take into account compensatory gain and/or normal growth spurts? Wouldn't those two things tend to skew the results a bit if they happened to occur while an animal is on test? I'm certain they have a means of standardizing things... does anyone know how it is done?
Click to expand...

That is true with any test no matter what one you talk about. The bulls were on test for 76 days. That would negate some of that.

Also, on a 600 lb calf, unless he was pretty thin, you won't get the compensatory gain like you would out of an older animal that was real green coming off grass and had the skeletol size already in place. I seen all of these bulls going in and none of them were real green.

In checking the data, this particular bull actually a hihger ADG the last half of the test than he did the first half. I would think that if he was experiencing compensatory gain on a large scale at all it would be the opposite


For those that want to learn more about RFI, go to www.growsafe.com.

It takes you to the site of the manufacturer and will talks about the early research of the RFI system of testing cattle for efficiency. I am sure it isn't perfect, but it is still a very good tool for those who want to select for true feed efficiency and not just higher performance and the larger mature size that tends to comes with it.

It was started in Canada so you never know though. :wink: :wink: :wink:
 
From the early work with RFI, it looks like the cattle that did well on RFI also were more efficient as cows on grass.

There isn't any research evidence to demonstrate that efficiency on grain is different than efficiency on grass. I think most of those perceived differences are due to simply having cattle that require more energy than forage can provide because they are have too much milk and are too big.

Most of the Feed Intake bull tests have a warm up period to take into account any compensatory gain.

RFI started in 1963 out of Nebraska by an ex-Eastern Montanan. 8)

Badlands
 
Northern Rancher said:
Just got your catalogue-man that 0700 bull is a TANK.
Click to expand...

Yes he is. He is a little older than the rest of them. I hope the rest continue to grow out like he did. That is one of the things I missed about having them on test. You don't get to watch them grow.

Here is a picture of 0700 for those who want to see him.


0700_0003FSCN1717.JPG


I appreciate all the comments and thoughts on this whole RFI test thing. I think there is still some things to learn about it and everyones thoughts certainly make me look at things from a different perspective. I really do feel that by taking advantages of things like this, it will put more money into the pockets of commercial cattleman. But it needs to be applied the right way.

Thanks again,

Brian
 
You know Brian, (and others on here) you should talk to Greg or Cody Jorgensen from Ideal SD. They've been doing this feed efficiency thing for 10 years now.
Better yet, go to their website:

http://www.jorgensenfarms.com/

Interesting stuff from good people.
 
Badlands said:
I think most of those perceived differences are due to simply having cattle that require more energy than forage can provide because they are have too much milk and are too big.
Click to expand...
I'm might be confused, but are those genetics differences.

The fact is that forage is THE BALANCED DIET for cattle...those that aren't functionally efficient on ADEQUATE forage are genetically deficient.
 
They are genetic differences in size and milk production, RobertMac, but not genetic differences in "efficiency". They are simply mismatched to their environment.


Corn is grass, remember? :wink:


Badlands
 
Grain is not leaf...starch is not cellulose, remember? :wink:

Different rumen bugs, different reaction by the metabolic systems...is that genetic???

RobertMac
 
RobertMac said:
Grain is not leaf...starch is not cellulose, remember? :wink:

Different rumen bugs, different reaction by the metabolic systems...is that genetic???

RobertMac
Click to expand...
Robertmac, My mentor and friend, and myself, have been entering bulls in feed (grain) tests and forage test for years.

The same bloodlines, or genetics..if you will, that do well in the grain tests (eating contests - :lol: ) have done equally as well in the forage tests.

We entered two flushmates in the two different types of tests one year and both had the highest ADG of all bulls in their respective tests, with the one in the grain test scoring the best Feed Conversion Ratio and the one in the forage test gained 4.54 lbs. per day.

Efficient metabolisms are efficient metabolisms, whatever the food source.

My $.02.
 
A very nice Bull..The first thing I noticed was his hip and depth....I'd welcome that bull no matter the breed.

One thing we have proven is when we select for something, we can change cattle fast. I think it would be interesting to compare the digestive tracts of these better performing cattle to others...Maybe we are selecting for rumen capacity, maybe metabolism in the time the feed stays in the vat to get broken down,

PPRM
 
PPRM said:
One thing we have proven is when we select for something, we can change cattle fast. I think it would be interesting to compare the digestive tracts of these better performing cattle to others...Maybe we are selecting for rumen capacity, maybe metabolism in the time the feed stays in the vat to get broken down,

PPRM
Click to expand...

Youre right, the heritability is somewhere aroung the .4 figure. We can't change what we don't measure though. I am not sure that the GI tract is where all the differences in efficiency are taking place. It may be somewhat at the rumen or gi level, but apparently some of the differences are at a molecular level. The energy transfer from the mitochondria within the cell may be resonsible for the differences. Skip to the last sentence on this report.

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publications.htm?seq_no_115=162479

This may very well explain why we are finding cattle that can be very efficient on a concentrate or a high roughage ration. I realize there are some cattle that can gain well on concentrated rations but will fall appart on forage rations, but that isn't measuring feed efficiency, only measuring gainability. We need cattle with both.

Brian
 
On my place, I am not as concerned with efficiency as I am with capacity. If they can't take in enough nutrition because of our sorry grass, they can't breed back, raise a calf , and maintain their condition. Capacity also shows up in pounds when they cross the scales.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top