USVI Public Records

Document text

1 Senepol Symposium, St. Croix, USVI November 8-10, 2002 Results of SCBA Sire Test in Paraguay John D. Hough1a, J. Keith Bertrand2 and José Pereira3 1EPD International, Inc., Statham, Georgia, USA 2 University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 3Ganadera Sesenta y Tres, Asuncion, Paraguay Summary A Senepol demonstration project was conducted on three commercial ranches in Paraguay starting in 1998. One calf crop was produced sired by 10 Senepol sires mated to native Zebu x British cows of varying percentages. A total of 337 calves were produced with a least one recorded measurement. Traits measured included birth, weaning and yearling weights as well as long yearling ultrasound fat thickness, ribeye area and intramuscular fat. This research / demonstration project was considered extremely successful by those involved. Significant sire differences were shown for most traits measured. Results very highly correlated to EPDs calculated from the Senepol National Genetic Evaluation. Yearling weight was the least correlated trait to EPDs. Carcass EPDs generated from this project have been very well received by Senepol breeders worldwide. Distribution of Senepol genetics throughout South America has been a direct result of this project. Introduction The Senepol Cattle Breeders Association (SCBA) had a desire to promote Senepol genetics in South America. The SCBA concluded it would be beneficial to conduct a demonstration project within South America to directly demonstrate the usefulness of Senepol genetics within that environment. In 1998 Jerry White, Senepol breeder and SCBA board member, initiated a cooperative research/demonstration project between US Senepol breeders and three commercial cattle ranches in central Paraguay. Mr. White oversaw the overall project. Dr. J. Keith Bertrand of the University of Georgia designed project and individual animal matings. Matings were stratified across herd, breed of dam and age of dam. Maintaining “connectedness” for the genetic analysis was utmost priority. José Pereira, owner of one of the Paraguayan ranches, managed project in Paraguay. The objectives of this project were to a) evaluate specific US sires for growth and carcass traits, b) to generate ultrasound measurements to calculate carcass EPDs, as well as birth, weaning and yearling EPDs and 3) to demonstrate the production of Senepol-sired calves in South America. –––––––––––––––– a Corresponding author: EPD International, Inc., PO Box 808, Statham, Georgia, Phone: 770/725-9811 Ext. 13, Fax: 770/725-5281, email: jhough@epdinternational.com 2 Materials and Methods Semen from 10 US Sires was sent to Paraguay late in 1998. Table 1 lists these 10 Fullblood Senepol sires and number of calves produced. This semen was bred to native Zebu x British cows on 3 Paraguayan Ranches. Table 2 lists the 3 ranches and numbers of calves produced on each ranch. A total of six unique totally nested dam breed types were represented on the 3 ranches. Each dam breed type was managed differently and thus each was considered a contemporary group. Table 3 lists the six dam breed types, their breed combination and number of progeny produced by each. There were a total of 178 male and 159 female calves produced. Table 4 shows the number of progeny per dam age classification and the days of age range per classification. Table 5 shows the distribution of calves across herds and sires. Connectedness was a primary concern with the design to insure appropriate design for the Senepol National Cattle Evaluation Program. Table 6 shows the sire by breed of dam (or contemporary group) distribution. The number of calves per age of dam and herd combination is show in table 7. Calves were born in 59-day period between August 14 and October 12, 1999. A total of 337 calves were produced in the project with at least one recorded measurement. There were 33.7 calves produced per sire. Calves were weaned at 222 ± 16 days of age and yearling weights were collected at 404 ± 13 days of age. Ultrasound data was collect at 653 ± 13 days. All calves were managed under commercial Paraguayan conditions in 6 total contemporary groups. No creep feed was administered. All males were castrated prior to weaning. Ultrasound collected by BIF / AUP certified technician, Rethel King of Harrisonville, Arkansas with an Aloka 500V ultrasound machine utilizing Designer Genes automated software. Traits (dependent variables) measured included birth weight (Bwt), weaning weight (Wnwt), yearling weight (Yrwt), ultrasound fat thickness (Fat), ultrasound ribeye area (REA) and ultrasound intramuscular fat percentage (IMF). The statistical utilized the SAS System, version 8.02. Results and Discussion Table 8 lists each of the dependent analysis variables as well as the covariates used in the statistical analysis. Given are the counts, means, standard deviations, minimums and maximums. These results are representative of an extensive management system in South America. Ultrasound measurements are typically collected at an earlier age (12 to 16 mo), but because of the management and no intact males being represented, it was decided an older age was more appropriate. Table 9 outlines the statistical model and significant effects for each of the six analysis variables. The birth weight analysis included the fixed effects of sire, sex, contemporary group, age of dam, sex X contemporary group and sex X age of dam interaction. The sire and contemporary group effects were significant at the .05 level. Sex X age of dam approached significance. Weaning weight included effects for sire, sex, contemporary group, age of dam, sex X contemporary group and sex X age of dam interaction along with a linear covariate for the weaning age of the calf. Significant sources of variation were found for sire, sex, contemporary group, age of dam, sex X contemporary group and the calf age covariate. Yearling weight included effects for sire, sex, contemporary group, and age of dam along with a linear covariate for the yearling age of the calf. The effects for sex X contemporary group and sex X age of dam interaction were not significant and were deleted from the model because 3 they created non-estimable sire least squares means problems. Sire, contemporary group and the age covariate were very significant sources of variation, with age of dam approaching significance. The same model was fit for the three ultrasound carcass traits. The models included effects for sire, sex, contemporary group, age of dam, sex X contemporary group and sex X age of dam interaction along with a linear covariate for the age of the calf at time of ultrasound measurement as well as a linear covariate for the weight of the calf at ultrasound measurement. The carcass traits showed much less significance than did the weight traits. Sire and sex X contemporary group was significant for Fat. Sex X contemporary group and the weight covariate were significant for REA. Only Sex X contemporary group was significant for IMF. The purpose of this analysis was to examine sire differences, thus the specific levels of the other effects in the model had only limited importance. Tables 10 through 15 show the least squares means adjusted for each of the model effects, the standard error associated with that mean and the comparable EPD independently generated from the Senepol National Genetic Evaluation program for each of the six analysis variables Bwt, Wnwt, Yrwt, Fat, REA and IMF, respectively. A simple linear regression was fit to test the significance between the least squares means and EPDs for each of the six dependent variables. Table 16 shows the levels of significance from this test. All traits except Yrwt were very significant, which was expected, since these measurements contributed towards the EPD analysis. The reason for the lack of significance in Yrwt is not know, but one would assume the level of management would be a contributing factor. Table 17 shows the correlations between EPD and least squares means for each of the six variables. As in the regression significance test, Yrwt was the only variable not very highly significant. Acknowledgements This project was partially funded by and appreciation is expressed to USDA-FAS through US Livestock Genetics Export, Inc., b) owners of the ten Senepol sires represented in the project and 3) the Senepol Cattle Breeders Association. 4 Table 1. Sires represented and number of progeny produced. Registration Number Sire Name Sire ID Progeny per sire 1076492 ASL CR DUTCHMAN 26E 26E 34 1062010 CN 5562 5562 40 1067681 CN 5825C 5825C 42 1072179 CN 5938D 5938D 37 1072703 CN 5991D 5991D 31 1064154 WC 850 850 36 1073416 HBC HOT STUFF 8E 8E 26 1080307 MAGNUM 27 Magnum 33 1079233 NOCONA Nocona 36 1063123 HBC CHIEF RENEGADE Renegade 22 Table 2. Calves produced per herd. Herd Herd ID Number Produced Ganadera 63 G 168 Paraguay Holding P 78 Sosa Ranch S 91 Table 3. Calves per Dam Breed (CGroup). Dam Breed Type* Contemporary Group Code Number of Calves Produced BR57_SG29_SI14 G_1 61 SI57_BR29_SG14 G_2 87 SG100 G_3 20 BR50_AN50 P_4 62 BR75_AN25 P_5 16 AN75_BR25 S_6 91 *Number is % of breed represented; BR=Brahman, SG=Santa Gertrudis, SI=Simmental, AN=Angus. Table 4. Calves per age of dam category. Dam Age (yr) Day Range* Calves Produced 3 1004-1338 298 4 1339-1703 24 5 1704+ 15 *BIF age of dam classification ranges. 5 Table 5. Calves per Sire x Herd Herd Sire G P S Total 26E 34 0 0 34 5562 30 10 0 40 5825C 0 18 24 42 5938D 18 0 19 37 5991D 14 17 0 31 850 36 0 0 36 8E 9 0 17 26 Magnum 10 5 18 33 Nocona 17 19 0 36 Renegade 0 9 13 22 Total 168 78 91 337 Table 6. Calves per Sire x Breed of Dam (Contemporary Group) Breed of Dam (CGroup) AN75_ BR25 BR50_ AN50 BR57_ SG29_ SI14 BR75_ AN25 SG100 SI57_ BR29_ SG14 Total Sire S_6 P_4 G_1 P_5 G_3 G_2 26E 0 0 16 0 0 18 34 5562 0 0 0 10 10 20 40 5825C 24 18 0 0 0 0 42 5938D 19 0 18 0 0 0 37 5991D 0 17 0 0 0 14 31 850 0 0 18 0 0 18 36 8E 17 0 9 0 0 0 26 Magnum 18 0 0 5 10 0 33 Nocona 0 19 0 0 0 17 36 Renegade 13 8 0 1 0 0 22 Total 91 62 61 16 20 87 337 *Number is % of breed represented; BR=Brahman, SG=Santa Gertrudis, SI=Simmental, AN=Angus. Table 7. Calves per Age of Dam x Herd. Herd Age of Dam G P S Total 3 156 51 91 298 4 2 22 0 24 5 10 5 0 15 Total 168 78 91 337 6 Table 8. Variable Counts, Means, Standard Deviations, Minimums and Maximums Variable N Mean Std Dev Minimum Maximum Bwt (lb) 337 72.13 9.54 46 97 Wnwt (lb) 318 412.1 52.3 273 595 Yrwt (lb) 264 550.2 103.4 340 904 USWt (lb) 305 795.0 124.5 534 1202 Fat (in) 305 0.1341 0.0518 0.03 0.37 REA (sq in) 305 8.955 1.448 5.7 13.0 IMF (%) 305 3.252 0.962 1.74 6.88 Dam Age, d 337 1176.8 254.4 1058 2956 Dam Age, yr 337 3.160 0.474 3 5 Wn Age, d 318 222.07 16.10 178 250 Yr Age, d 264 404.19 12.71 369 427 US Age, d 305 653.04 12.57 619 676 Table 9. Statistical models and significant effects for each dependant variable. Effect Bwt Wnwt Yrwt Fat REA IMF Sire * *** *** * ns ns Sex ns + ns Ns ns ns Cgroup * *** *** Ns ns ns Dam Age ns ** + Ns ns ns Sex * CGroup ns *** X *** * * Sex * Dam Age + ns X Ns ns ns Wn Age (cov) X *** X X X X Yr Age (cov) X X *** X X X US Age (cov) X X X Ns ns ns USWt (cov) X X X Ns *** ns X=Effect not in model, ns=P>.10, +P<.10, *=P<.05, **=P<.01, ***=P<.001 Table 10. Birth weight least squares means, standard errors and EPD for sire. Sire Mean Std Error EPD 5825C 70.74 1.96 -0.1 5991D 70.76 2.35 -0.3 5562 70.90 1.93 -0.1 Renegade 73.28 2.37 3.3 5938D 74.18 2.07 1.7 850 75.95 2.10 2.8 8E 76.08 2.27 2.7 Nocona 76.08 2.14 3.5 Magnum 76.14 2.08 2.6 26E 77.75 2.14 3.0 7 Table 11. Weaning weight least squares means, standard errors and EPD for sire. Sire Mean Std Error EPD 5938D 436.3 8.5 29.1 850 423.9 8.6 12.3 26E 423.3 8.6 14.0 Nocona 418.6 8.7 13.6 5562 413.7 7.7 8.2 8E 409.1 9.0 11.7 5825C 400.6 7.9 7.9 Magnum 400.6 8.3 3.0 5991D 393.7 9.6 3.7 Renegade 372.8 9.5 5.2 Table 12. Yearling weight least squares means, standard errors and EPD for sire. Sire Mean Std Error EPD Nocona 567.8 11.5 17.7 5562 566.5 9.7 9.8 850 563.1 11.3 11.5 Magnum 560.3 11.7 5.6 26E 555.0 11.5 16.0 5938D 549.8 13.6 33.4 5991D 533.3 12.4 6.1 8E 527.5 14.1 12.3 5825C 523.0 11.7 9.9 Renegade 510.5 12.3 11.3 Table 13. Fat thickness least squares means, standard errors and EPD for sire. Sire Mean Std Error EPD 5938D 0.1032 0.0106 -0.008 26E 0.1108 0.0109 -0.004 8E 0.1111 0.0115 -0.005 5825C 0.1117 0.0099 -0.007 Renegade 0.1181 0.0118 -0.005 Nocona 0.1222 0.0109 0.001 850 0.1228 0.0106 0.006 5991D 0.1296 0.0118 0.004 5562 0.1362 0.0095 0.006 Magnum 0.1564 0.0108 0.017 8 Table 14. Ribeye area least squares means, standard errors and EPD for sire. Sire Mean Std Error EPD 850 9.574 0.305 0.43 5991D 9.354 0.339 0.15 5562 9.294 0.273 0.20 26E 9.245 0.313 0.21 5938D 9.168 0.305 0.29 Nocona 9.164 0.314 0.18 5825C 9.024 0.285 -0.02 Magnum 8.764 0.311 0.01 Renegade 8.481 0.340 -0.23 8E 8.471 0.330 -0.21 Table 15. Intramuscular fat least squares means, standard errors and EPD for sire. Sire Mean Std Error EPD 5825C 3.470 0.206 0.36 5991D 3.344 0.246 0.20 Magnum 3.285 0.226 0.10 5562 3.215 0.198 0.11 850 3.210 0.221 0.10 5938D 3.128 0.221 0.03 8E 3.061 0.239 0.02 Renegade 2.931 0.247 -0.10 26E 2.900 0.227 -0.16 Nocona 2.844 0.228 -0.19 Table 16. Level of significance for sire EPDs predicting sire LS means. Trait Significance Level Bwt 0.0010 Wnwt 0.0059 Yrwt 0.6483 Fat <.0001 REA <.0001 IMF <.0001 Table 17. Product moment correlations between sire EPDs and sire LS means Trait Correlation Bwt 0.87*** Wnwt 0.80** Yrwt 0.17 Fat 0.96*** REA 0.94*** IMF 0.98*** ** = P < .01, *** = P < .001