6.1: Guidelines for Individual Herds

Seedstock producers must have a long-range breeding program in order to produce the consistent genetic change required to allow continued improvement in production efficiency within their customers’ herds. Therefore, seedstock producers need to understand the recommendations that follow so they can develop such a breeding program. Individual goals and programs must to some extent be unique to serve the unique needs of their customers, but should reflect a consistent underlying philosophy of long-term directed genetic change based on objective measures of performance.

6.2:Information Needed for Selection and Culling by Seedstock Producers

6.2.1: Calf performance. Calf performance records should include information obtained at birth and weamng and during the postweaning period. Performance should be defined in relation to a contemporary group of individuals of approximately the same age and under the same management. Contemporary groups should be clearly defined and animals within a contemporary group should, to the greatest extent possible, be given an equal opportunity to express their genetic potential. Information on objectively-measured traits (weights, measures, etc.) will normally be expressed as deviations from, or ratios to, the contemporary group mean. Subjective measures (calving ease scores, frame scores, etc.) will generally be expressed as actual scores. Some objective measures such as gestation length and hip height may show relatively little variation among contemporary groups and may be reported in actual units instead of as ratios.

Data recorded at birth should include actual birth weights, birth weight ratios, and calving ease scores. Data recorded at weaning should include the age and actual weaning weight of the calf. This data should be used to calculate adjusted 205-day weaning weights and ratios. Postweaning data should include either yearling or long-yearling weights and actual ages at the time of weighing. Weights should be adjusted to either a 365-, 452-, or 550-day basis and expressed as ratios to the contemporary group mean. Certain linear measures such as scrotal circumference or hip height at weaning or yearling ages may also be useful, depending upon the goals of the breeding program. Culling of calves should be minimized at weaning. It is particularly desirable that postweaning performance be obtained for all bull calves.

To whatever extent possible, seedstock producers should use the capabilities of the various breed associations to obtain expected progeny differences (EPDs) on individuals for the calf performance traits (see sections and 9.2 and 13). These should generally be available for birth weight, weaning weight, weaning weight-maternal, and yearling weight. These measures provide the most complete assessment available of an individual’s likely genetic merit and have primary value for selection.

6.2.2: Cowherd information. Information on calf performance can be accumulated over time and combined with information on each cow’s reproductive history to produce a cumulative produce-of-dam summary for each cow in the herd. The information that is required to compile a meaningful reproductive history includes breeding dates (either as dates bred for Al or time exposed for natural service), calving dates (including both dead and live calves), and information on ease of calving.

The produce-of-dam summary should then include: (1) a summary of the reproductive history, (2) means for adjusted birth and 205-day weight ratios for her calves, and (3) expected progeny differences for calf performance traits (direct and maternal) as available from the appropriate breed association. Supplemental information appropriate to individual breeding programs (such as cow weights or udder scores) may also be included on the produce-of-dam summary. Produce-of-dam summaries should be designed to provide a concise picture of a cow’s productive life and used to cull lowly-productive females from the herd.

The heightened availability of on-ranch computers has generated interest in combining individual cow productivity information with herd financial records and inventory information to produce integrated breeding herd management systems. Such systems would facilitate both breeding selection and management decisions. For example, calving date distributions, relationships between weight and calving ease in heifers, and use of disposal codes to identify reasons for involuntary culling would all assist in both identification of superior cows and in identification of areas that need management attention. These integrated systems, if they become readily available, would also assist in clarifying relationships between expected progeny differences and overall herd profitability.

6.2.3: Herd Sires. Sire selection is a sequential process. New herd sire candidates should initially be selected on their EPDs for economically important traits as provided by the appropriate performance-testing organization. These herd sire candidates may include both young sires produced in the herd as well as proven sires evaluated in other herds and available through Al Use of EPDs will facilitate comparison of such bulls from different sources. Sire candidates should be mated to a random sample of available cows, and the performance of their progeny summarized for the calf performance traits discussed above. These summaries would include progeny averages and average ratios (within contemporary groups) for birth weight, calving ease scores, adjusted 205-day weights, and adjusted postweaning weights. This information provides specific information on the relative performance of the sires in the specific environment and management system of interest as well as contributing to more sophisticated breeding value estimates for the sires, relatives, and their progeny that can be performed by the appropriate breed association.

The opportunity to participate in National Cattle Evaluation programs is an important aspect of within-herd breeding programs. Individual breeders need to find ways to have semen from a sample of their sires used in several herds and likewise should use sires listed in national cattle evaluations and available through Al within their herds. This process can greatly assist breeders in identifying the position of their herd relative to the breed as a whole for the major performance traits. The data generated by such widespread use of sires likewise provides a basis for future breed-wide (rather than within herd) breeding value estimation.

Evaluations of herd bulls can be seriously biased by nonrandom mating. It is extremely important that all bulls being compared have an equal opportunity to express their genetic merit. This will happen only if cows are assigned to bulls in a strictly random manner and if the resulting sire progenies all receive comparable treatment. The only way to produce consistent genetic change is to consistently identify new sires that are superior to existing herd hulls.

6.3:Merchandising for Seedstock Producers

Effective merchandising depends upon the integrity of the breeder coupled with a dear definition of the product that is to be sold. Seedstock producers with comprehensive and accurate records of production that can be presented in a concise and easily-understood manner have a valuable resource for use in the sale of animals. The credibility of the records can be maximized if they are combined with a sound, progressive management program. Breeder integrity, not only in records but also in dealings with others, helps separate the true seedstock producers from the multipliers.

Standard terminology relative to beef cattle improvement has been developed through BIF. Use of this terminology is important and is strongly encouraged by BIF for merchandising of performance-tested cattle. Use of 205-day adjusted weights; 365-, 452-, 550-day adjusted weights; include weight ratios and number of contemporaries; EPDs are encouraged. In contrast, use of misleading information is detrimental to the whole concept of performance testing and should be avoided. Examples of misleading phrases include:

• "During a 60-day test, this bull gained 5 pounds per day."
• "Calf weighed 460 pounds at 4 months of age."
• "One calf sired by this bull weighed 1,220 pounds at 14 months"

Comprehensive performance data can be assembled and presented as follows:

6.3.1: Expected Progeny Difference. Listings of EPDs for important traits for animals offered for sale provide a concise means of presentation of performance to potential buyers.

6.3.2: Performance pedigrees. Pedigrees that combine the genealogy with records of performance and EPDs of the individual and his ancestors are useful in promoting individuals. A major role of progressive performance-testing organizations would involve providing such pedigrees to their members. Performance pedigrees discourage reporting of incomplete or selected performance data and provide a concise picture of the performance history of an individual.

A performance pedigree should at least include individual performance and progeny information (if available) on the animal, sire, dam and maternal grandsire, and EPDs on the individual for pertinent traits. BIF recommends that the following basic information be included on each performance pedigree:

• Animal’s individual record:
   
  --Birth weight, birth weight ratio and EPD.
  --Adjusted 205-day weight ratio and EPD.
  --365-, 452-, or 550-day yearling weight ratio and EPD.
  --Number of contemporaries at weaning and yearling.

Individual weights should not be reported on performance pedigrees due to large environmental variations but rather ratios and EPDs.

• Number of progeny and average performance ratios for each individual or group of individuals used in the calculation of EPDs.
• EPDs and progeny ratios may be added for additional traits that are considered important.

6.4:Example of a Performance Program

Using the basics of sound performance testing has led to a general performance program designed for breeders as shown in the following outline. The outline follows a calf crop from breeding of the cows to use made of particular stock.

6.4.1: Outline of Performance Program

6.5:Guidelines far Performance Programs of Organizations of Seedstock Producers

About three percent of the national beef cowherd is registered and has constituted the germnpiasm base from which genetic change is made in commercial beef production. Choices among and selection within breeds are involved, and competition among breeds (supplying germplasm) is stiff. Most breed associations have a sound performance program available to their breeders.

Most associations recognize the importance of promoting their performance program, and providing their breeders with innovative yet simple programs. These programs allow breeders to be competitive through accurate selection and effective merchandising. Association assistance to their breeders in their performance evaluation is one of the keys to effective competition for the commercial germplasm dollar as the entire beef industry moves into a "specification of product" era.

There are definite advantages for each breed to have its own unique performance program; yet disadvantages do exist, especially for breeds that register small numbers of cattle. Breed associations that can conduct their own programs have a higher probability of survival. They can place special emphasis on improving particular traits through their breed programs. Thus, they can enhance the performance of their breed for traits of value to commercial producers. Therefore, they are more likely to provide seedstock to commercial producers in the future.

The more records processed, the cheaper the cost per record. This argues for central processing on a relatively uniform performance program. The beef performance movement started with a rapid proliferation of programs; the number has since been reduced. How far we move toward central processing will depend on economics and leadership direction. Currently, some strong breed association programs exist along with several viable state programs. Numerous performance programs that address the needs of seedstock producers exist, but the commercial producer wishing to keep performance records sometimes has difficulty finding a program. Expanded use of on-farm computing technology may ease this problem as appropriate software is developed.

6.6:Basics of Sound Performance Testing

Sound performance programs are simple. However, a good knowledge of basics is required by organizations that offer these programs and breeders who use them. Some of these basics are as follows:

• It is necessary to understand a basic performance test.
• Always measure differences, never absolutes.
• Definition of contemporary groups is critical.
• Input forms should be simple in design.
• Knowledge of record analysis procedures is mandatory.
• Output forms should have a simple format.
• Attempt to integrate the basic performance program with ancillary programs.
• Attempt to anticipate future opportunities.

A discussion of each of these basics follows.

6.6.1: Basic performance tests. It is necessary to understand a basic performance test. Most tests for weight traits are age-constant. However, an adjustment for small age differences result in more accurate tests than allowing day-to-day environment to be different and weighing each calf at an actual age. BIF has defined a standard test to measure differences in 205-day, age-of-dam-adjusted weaning weights. Several defined postweaning tests that differ in the age and management considered can be added to this test. Adjusted yearling weight can be evaluated for each test. To have a performance test, some aspect must be fixed to allow comparisons to be made. To evaluate breeds that differ drastically in biological type, performance tests have been conducted which end at a weight or fat constant point rather than only at a constant age. The evaluation of the same animals will differ depending on whether the end point is age, fat, or weight. Organizations conducting performance programs should evaluate alternative postweaning tests and select the one best suited for their breeders. However, the results of such tests should be presented as consistently as is possible among breeds to facilitate evaluation of individuals within different breeds by commercial producers.

6.6.2: Measure differences. A basic concept of performance testing involves emphasis on measurement of differences rather than absolutes. Groups of animals born in different years or produced under different management or nutritional conditions will differ in their absolute level of expression of performance traits. However, these differences may or may not have any genetic basis and in many cases are almost totally due to environmental (nongenetic) differences.

Genetic differences among animals are likely to be expressed in a consistent way only when major identifiable sources of environmental variation are held constant (such as comparing only calves born in the year and season and managed in the same way) or adjusted for (such as the adjustments for age of dam). Thus, animals should be evaluated for genetic differences by observing differences among comparable groups of animals evaluated under standard test conditions. Mean levels of performance will differ from test to test, but provide much less genetic information than do differences among animals within each test.

Even when performance testing is properly done, genetic differences will comprise a relatively small part of the total observed variation. Even for a relatively highly heritable trait such as yearling weight, only perhaps 1/3 of the variation is attributable to genetic differences (heritable). This occurs because uncontrollable environmental differences remain large relative to genetic differences.

6.6.3: Contemporary groups. Accuracy in estimation of genetic differences within a group of animals is fled to accuracy in placing animals in contemporary groups. The individual breeders are the only ones who truly know how animals in their herds should be grouped. A definition of a contemporary group is one in which animals of a given sex and age, having had similar treatment, are given equal opportunity to perform under standard test conditions. The group size should include as many animals as can be fairly compared. Correct grouping eliminates the possibility of year-round calving; prevents preferential treatment of show animals (unless their data are removed from the performance records); and promotes a minimum-length calving season. Selections made within contemporary groups are best but are not always possible. Organizations with large performance programs must develop a way for individual breeders to define their contemporary groups, and assist them in making comparisons across contemporary groups.

6.6.4: Input records. Input forms should be simple in design. There will be an input form at the end of most specified test periods. These include a breeding (inventory), calving, weaning, yearling, and sometimes a carcass form. Since most programs started with a calving-weaning form, some difficulty has been experienced in the use of the breeding and calving forms, but expanded use of these forms is needed to facilitate genetic evaluation of reproduction and fitness traits. The most important characteristic of input forms is simplicity and ease of use by the customer-breeder.

When breeders request information on how to start their performance programs, this initial information is most critical to getting their participation. The forms for their performance records must be simple, easy to fill out, and if possible, contain a preprinted list of their cowherd. The form should include simple introductions to the performance program which list the procedures for becoming involved. It must clearly give the options available and include sound reasons for making the effort. Many times, breeders become disenchanted and quit long before they have collected enough records to see how useful they can be. To involve the new participant in an educational program, it could prove valuable to use several calf crops of the "computer cow game" as a participating educational tool. Breeders could thus actually observe a response to selection based on records of performance and thus be encouraged in their efforts to evaluate their own herd.

Special attention to new participants by the organization could improve the participation rate, decrease the error rate (which always requires phone calls, mailings, and the waste of valuable time), and increase the initial interest of the new participant. Breeders who like recordkeeping are already participating. Many breeders feel they must become involved to survive, but some do not have real interest unless they are encouraged.

The input forms are handled by the breeder, and the measurements are recorded on these forms. The paper must be of high quality to withstand "chute" accidents. Forms should be uniform and conventional in size so the breeder can handle the forms with ordinary clipboards and notebooks. Vest pocket recordbooks are popular because they are easy to use and carry. Attention needs to be given to making a vest pocket recordbook that could be photocopied and sent to the organization without being recopied by hand. The organization could then print the permanent records for filing.

A useful order of animals is essential on all input forms. A registration number or a permanent number is also essential for accurate data management but is of little use to the customer. Whenever possible, previous records should be preprinted on sequential input forms to help eliminate gross errors. Use of carbon paper or paper producing two copies should be avoided, unless a copy machine is not available.

The input forms should not be crowded. Space on the forms will facilitate easy recording by breeders and allow room for innovative breeders to record measures they think would be useful in their breeding program. The exchange procedure should be simple so breeders can send in completed forms easily and obtain an analyzed data report and the sequential prelisted output form back as soon as possible. A herd records calendar giving the yearly sequence of events can aid participation. The producer should be able to request preprinted forms to be sorted in the order that suits his needs.

Increasing numbers of producers have access to sophisticated, on-farm computing equipment. This equipment holds tremendous potential for integration of financial, inventory, and performance information and for electronic communication between the individual producer and the performance-testing organization. The opportunity for preliminary data processing and summarization on the farm before transmission to the central processing center is also very real. For example, adjusted 205-day weights might be calculated and dam summaries updated on the farm; the adjusted data then sent to a central computer; and EPDs calculated there and returned for printing and integration into the on-farm data base. Progressive seedstock organizations should take the lead in development of software that will facilitate such transfers and that will be consistent with both the needs of the individual for within-herd recordkeeping and with the needs of the association. Failure to act will likely result in adoption of highly variable and potentially incompatible computer systems by progressive individual breeders.

6.6.5: Record analysis. Knowledge of record analysis procedures is mandatory. Considerable differences exist in the procedures used for record analyses among organizations providing performance programs to breeders. BIF has both appropriate procedures for age adjustments and recommended time intervals between which age adjustments can accurately be made. Many breed associations now have their own adjustment factors for age and sex (see Appendix Table 12.2).

Current accepted procedures for record analysis generally use ratios to compare the performance of animals in different contemporary groups. A ratio is the record of an animal divided by the contemporary group average and multiplied by 100 to give an average ratio of 100 within all contemporary groups. Animals with ratios above 100 are above the average, and animals with ratios below 100 are below average. Thus, animals may be compared in terms of their relative positions within the appropriate contemporary groups.

The present reasonably high use of Al in seedstock herds has allowed development in most breeds of a rather extensive network of genetic links among herds. This network develops when sires have progeny in many different herds and forms the basis for National Sire Evaluation programs. Statistical models now exist to use this network of linkages to allow between-herd breeding value estimation. Such evaluations allow animals to be compared across the breed as a whole with respect to genetic differences among contemporary groups (and, therefore, among herds) and would supplant the EBV ratio system with a system of EPDs analogous to (and tied to) those of National Cattle Evaluation. In particular, this system allows simultaneous comparison of proven bulls from national sire summaries with young bulls produced within individual herds. The computational requirements of such an analysis are formidable, but current developments in computer technology have made it a reality. Performance testing organizations should, therefore, be cognizant of these opportunities and use them.

6.6.6: Output records. Output forms need to have a simple format. The critical issue, however, is timing--getting the analyzed records back to the breeders in time for them to use the records for selection. The advent of on-farm computers allows breeders to easily adjust their records on the spot and make choices based on an animal’s individual performance. For many situations, such information will be adequate, at least for preliminary decisions. However, the need for accuracy when comparing all females or all males in the herd requires better analyses, especially when using information on relatives. Performance programs that fail to develop a fast "turnaround" time are less likely to be used and rightly so.

Cluttered output forms with the wrong order of animals are not satisfactory. In its standardization efforts, BIF has suggested the ~ preferable measure for a trait. Performance programs should include only one measure of a trait. Excessive amounts of numbers on output forms are difficult to read. A ‘one animal-one line" approach is a useful guideline. For ease in filing reports, the paper size and quality should be the same as that for the input forms.

Sire and dam summaries should be simple yet complete, reporting all performance information available. A question exists on whether it is necessary to have both parental summaries and breeding value selection worksheets. If only one dam’s history is summarized per page, this page could serve as the place to record health and other useful records. Timing of these summaries is also critical. The selection of cows and heifersdo be wintered after weaning and pregnancy testing could be improved if both the summaries of the dams and the selection worksheets of all females are available.

Selection worksheets are current documents that reports the information available at the time of their compilation. Thus, when new worksheets are obtained, old ones with less information can be discarded. The need exists to help breeders develop a filing system for their performance reports that will give them a concise explanation of the use of each report. Dividers can help to organize the files. If breeders cannot find particular reports easily, they are less apt to use them.

Procedures exist, even within large programs, to design and construct specific performance programs for breeders at a price. These specific performance programs would be an excellent way to develop innovative procedures that later could be incorporated into a standard performance program. Actually, providing novice performance breeders with relatively sophisticated output is a useful participating educational tool; and it would have the breeders’ interest since the cattle are their own.

There is a primary need to standardize output and reporting procedures among performance- testing organizations. The widespread use of crossbreeding among commercial cattlemen means that individual producers often buy bulls of several breeds. The use of different reporting procedures among breeds makes merchandising to such buyers difficult.

6.6.7: Integrate basic and ancillary programs. Every effort should be made to integrate ancillary programs such as National Cattle Evaluation with the basic performance program. Current procedures for National Cattle Evaluations which use all the bask performance data of a breed to estimate EPDs for all traits (including maternal) complete this link in one direction.

6.6.8: Future opportunities. Anticipation of future opportunities is helpful and is the cornerstone of developing and maintaining a second, innovative performance program.

New data analysis procedures continue to be developed and prepared for assimilation into the national performance programs. New procedures for estimation of genetic values for categorical traits (such as calving ease scores or other scored traits) continue to be developed.

Opportunities to integrate performance-testing programs with whole-ranch enterprise planning and evaluation abound. Computer software to facilitate farm planning, management decisions, and financial recordkeeping is rapidly being developed and should be integrated with bask performance-testing programs. Such integration would facilitate more critical economic analysis of selection programs and breeding goals.

Use of electronic communication procedures to facilitate transfer of information between producers and recordkeeping organizations provides an opportunity to reduce costs and reduce processing times for input data. More on-farm processing of basic data using microcomputers could greatly improve the efficiency of performance programs.