<%BANNER%>

UFIR IFAS



Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ ( Publisher's URL )
CITATION PDF VIEWER
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/IR00001641/00001
 Material Information
Title: Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle
Physical Description: Fact Sheet
Creator: Hansen, Gary R.
Publisher: University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agriculture Sciences, EDIS
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2006
 Notes
Acquisition: Collected for University of Florida's Institutional Repository by the UFIR Self-Submittal tool. Submitted by Melanie Mercer.
Publication Status: Published
General Note: "Original publication date April 28, 2006."
General Note: "AN164"
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida Institutional Repository
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the submitter.
System ID: IR00001641:00001

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:

AN16400 ( PDF )


Full Text

PAGE 1

AN164 Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle1 Gary R. Hansen and David G. Riley2 The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean Performance records of the individual, Adjustment for differences in relative merit Expect Progeny Difference

PAGE 2

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 2 Genetic Trends Average Breed EPDs Accuracy

PAGE 3

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 3 Figure 1. Possible Change Values for two Charolais bulls (American International Charolais Association. Available at: http://www.charolaisusa http://www.charolaisusa.com/TM/tabID__3479/ tailored.aspx Accessed February 2006.

PAGE 4

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 4 Do EPDs Work? Using EPDs Producer 1 would benefit most from growth Producer 2 would consider bull D as his/her Producer 3 would consider bulls B or C Producer 4 would benefit most from milk Producer 5 would consider a bull that Producer 6 would consider Bull B or E.

PAGE 5

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 5 Contemporary Grouping Include only animals of the same gender. Two animals are required to form a Insure that all animals within a contemporary Animals weighed more than three days apart Percentile Ranking Summary

PAGE 6

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 6 Production Traits Four traits are routinely reported by breed associations that conduct National Cattle Evaluation analyses: BW (Birth Weight) WW (Weaning Weight) YW (Yearling Weight) Milk Traits reported by various breed associations include: CE (Calving Ease) CED (Calving Ease Direct) CEM, MCE (Calving Ease Maternal, Maternal Calving Ease) CETM (Calving Ease Total Maternal) CW (Carcass Weight) DOC (Docility) Fat (Fat Thickness) GL (Gestation Length) HPG (Heifer Pregnancy) IMF (Intramuscular Fat)

PAGE 7

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 7 ME (Maintenance Energy) MARB, MB (Marbling) MH (Mature Height)MW (Mature Weight) M &G, TM, MWW (Milk and Growth, Total Maternal, Maternal Weaning Weight) REA, RE (Ribeye Area) %RP (Percent Retail Product) SC, SCR (Scrotal Circumference) SHR (Shear Force) STAY, ST (Stayability) UFAT (Scan Fat, Ultrasound Fat) YG (Yield Grade) EPD Accuracy Value I (Interim EPD Accuracy) P, PE (Pedigree Estimate)

PAGE 8

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 8 Table 1. Growth Trait EPDs for Two Bulls. Bull ID Birth Weight Weaning Weight Yearling Weight A +5.6 +44 +96 B +1.6 +32 +78 Predicted Difference 4.0 12 18 Table 2. Hereford Genetic Trend by Birth Year. Year BW EPD WW EPD YW EPD Milk EPD Scrotal Circumference EPD 1974 -0.5 6.9 9.2 2.1 -0.8 1980 0.1 10.5 15.6 3.1 -0.6 1985 1.3 17.7 28.2 5.0 -0.3 1990 2.7 24.8 40.8 6.1 0.0 1995 3.4 29.7 49.4 8.9 0.3 2000 3.7 33.3 55.8 11.9 0.4 2005 3.7 38.5 65.6 14.9 0.7 Table 3. Current Breed Average EPDs of Active Sires (2005-2006). Breed BW EPD WW EPD YW EPD Milk EPD Scrotal Circumference EPD Angus 2.3 38.0 70.0 19.0 0.33 Braford 0.8 7.0 10.0 1.0 --Brahman 2.1 15.1 25.5 7.3 --Brangus 2.0 23.4 39.9 10.9 0.63 Beefmaster 0.6 8.0 14.0 3.0 0.06 Charolais 1.2 21.1 18.1 6.4 0.37 Gelbvieh 1.9 41.0 73.0 18.0 0.40 Hereford 3.7 38.5 65.6 14.9 0.70 Limousin 2.3 36.9 68.9 18.2 0.20 Red Angus 0.6 32.0 56.0 17.0 --S. Gertrudis 0.7 4.4 5.6 0.2 --Simbrah 3.5 26.4 41.1 3.7 --Simmental 1.8 34.1 59.5 5.4 --Table 4. Possible Change in EPD Values at Different Accuracy Levels (AICA Spring 2005). ACC BWT WWT MILK YWT SC HCW REA FAT MARB 0.0 4.1 21.1 14.0 31.3 0.75 16.7 0.42 0.038 0.27 0.1 3.9 20.4 14.0 30.3 0.69 15.0 0.38 0.034 0.24 0.2 3.7 19.4 13.6 28.8 0.62 13.5 0.34 0.030 0.21 0.3 3.4 17.8 12.9 26.4 0.55 11.9 0.30 0.027 0.18

PAGE 9

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 9 Table 4. Possible Change in EPD Values at Different Accuracy Levels (AICA Spring 2005). ACC BWT WWT MILK YWT SC HCW REA FAT MARB 0.4 3.0 15.5 11.8 23.0 0.48 10.1 0.26 0.023 0.16 0.5 2.6 13.1 10.1 19.5 0.41 8.4 0.22 0.019 0.13 0.6 2.2 10.7 8.5 16.0 0.35 6.7 0.18 0.015 0.10 0.7 1.8 8.2 6.7 12.3 0.28 5.1 0.14 0.011 0.08 0.8 1.3 5.7 5.5 8.5 0.21 3.6 0.10 0.008 0.05 0.9 0.8 3.1 3.7 5.0 0.14 2.0 0.06 0.004 0.03 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.000 0.00 Table 5. Levels of Accuracy and Associated Risk. Accuracy Level Risk Level Associated Change in EPD Value as More Data is Included in the National Cattle Evaluation < .40 High Highly likely to change with more information .41 to .60 Moderate Change is somewhat likely as few progeny records are included .61 to .80 Low Small likelihood for change-numerous progeny records included in the analysis > .81 Very Low Very little change likely

PAGE 10

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 10 Table 6. Rank Comparison of EPD and Actual Performance. Bull Id Birth EPD BEPD Rank Bir Wt Birth WT Rank Wean EPD WEPD Rank Wean Wt. Wean Wt Rank Year EPD YR EPD Rank Year Wt. YR Wt Rank 6340 -0.4 4 80 4 0.4 6 586 6 10.0 6 1061 6 7029 2.9 5 83 5 21.9 3* 618 2* 41.1 2* 1093 3* 8818 -0.8 3 79 3 3.6 5 594 5 26.5 5 1078 5 0420 -1.8 2* 77 1* 6.2 4 611 4 27.4 4 1080 4 1497 -1.9 1* 78 2* 24.8 2* 617 3* 36.8 3* 1097 2* 2609 6.5 6 88 6 42.7 1 636 1 76.8 1 1114 1 *Indicates a rank change between EPD and performance information.

PAGE 11

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 11 Table 7. Predicted Difference VS. Actual Performance Difference of Two High Accuracy EPD Bulls (>90%) Mated to Cows of Similar Genetic Merit. Birth Weaning Yearling Bull Id BEPD BWT WEPD WWT YEPD YWT 7029 2.98321.961841.11093 6340 -0.4 80 0.4 586 10.0 1061 Difference3.43.021.532.031.132.0

PAGE 12

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 12 Table 8. Matching EPDs to Production Goals. Selection/ Goals CED BW WW YM MM SC Fat REA IMF 1. Maximize growth with no replacements kept (terminal cross). none none maximize maximize none none none none none 2. Improve growth maintain milk. none none maximize maximize 15-20 none none none none 3. Inseminate yearling heifers/minimize dystocia while maintaining growth. >3.0 <0.8 30-38 60-65 15-20 none none none none 4. Improve weaning weight while holding cow mature size at present levels. Post-weaning growth is adequate. Calves sold at weaning. Cows maintain adequate condition with little supplementation. none none 38-42 60-70 25+ none none none none 5. Improve carcass quality along with increased growth potential of offspring. none none 40+ 60+ none none none none 0.15+ 6. Save replacement heifers and decrease age of puberty within the herd. Current levels of production for calving ease, weaning and post-weaning gain are acceptable. >0.3 <3.7 38+ 65+ 25+ >0.7 none none none Table 9. EPDs for Prospective Sires. Bull Id CED BW WW YW MM SC Fat REA IMF A -3.0 4.9 51 88 4 0.8 -0.02 0.29 -0.05 B 4.0 0.5 42 64 22 1.2 0.09 0.12 0.19 C 5.0 -1.5 34 58 18 0.3 0.08 -0.20 0.20 D -4.0 4.5 45 77 30 0.7 0.05 0.35 0.18 E 1.5 3.2 39 69 35 1.5 0.20 0.05 0.12

PAGE 13

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 13 Table 9. EPDs for Prospective Sires. Breed Average -0.3 3.7 38 65 15 0.7 0.001 0.09 0.00 Table 10. Independent Culling Levels for Five traits and EPDs for Three Sires That Match Those Levels. Sire/ ICLS CED BW WW YW SC CEM Milk CW Marb REA Fat ICLS +1 +43 +82 +.35 +.26 F +9 +1.5 +43 +84 +.46 +8 +33 +9 +.35 +.14 +.025 G +4 +4.5 +46 +85 +.85 +2 +12 +9 +.36 +.00 +.015 H +3 +4.0 +60 +108 +1.52 +7 +26 +13 +.33 +.18 -.023 Table 11. Percentile Breakdown Current Sires (Angus 2006). Top Production Maternal Carcass Ultrasound Pct CED BW WW YW YH SC CEM Milk MH CW Marb RE FAT IMF RE FAT 1% +13 -2.4 +61 +109 +1.2 +1.63 +13 +32 +1.9 +34 +.68 +.64 -.056 +.51 +.75 -.033 5% +11 -.8 +54 +96 +.9 +1.18 +11 +29 +1.3 +23 +.49 +.44 -.038 +.34 +.55 -.022 10% +9 -.1 +50 +90 +.8 +.98 +10 +26 +1.1 +18 +.40 +.37 -0.29 +.27 +.46 -.016 20% +8 +.8 +46 +83 +.7 +.74 +9 +24 +.8 +11 +.30 +.29 -.019 +.19 +.34 -.010

PAGE 14

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in Beef Cattle 14 Table 11. Percentile Breakdown Current Sires (Angus 2006). 30% +7 +1.4 +43 +79 +.6 +.58 +8 +22 +.7 +10 +.23 +.23 -.012 +.13 +.26 -.005 40% +5 +1.9 +40 +75 +.5 +.45 +7 +20 +.6 +7 +.17 +.18 -.006 +.09 +.19 -.001 50% +4 +2.3 +38 +71 +.4 +.31 +6 +19 +.5 +4 +.12 +.13 -.001 +.05 +.13 +.002 75% +1 +3.6 +32 +61 +.2 -.01 +4 +15 +.2 -1 +0 +0 +.013 -.05 -.02 +.013 100% -25 -15.5 -26 -26 -1.1 -1.58 -19 -18 -1.0 -31 -.65 -.61 +.086 -.70 -.80 +.075