Even the stage of maturity at which we graze our forages can influence epigenetics of our animals. This is the sweet spot. Grazing at mid-stage maturity rather than highly, highly vegetative, affords far better epigenetic impact, positive epigenetic impact in our livestock and in our plants and in our soil microbes, by the way.
So in other words, the entire microbiome functions better when we target most of our grazing at this stage of our plant life. Did y'all know that? The entire microbiome genetically functions much, much better here, but we're taught to do most of our grazing where, right here, aren't we?
That's what we've been taught. Folks, we've been way off. Way off. And we've been harming ourselves epigenetically because of that. This is very crucial to positive epigenetic response in everything in that microbiome.
Any questions about that? Yes, sir. One or on the other end of the scale of grazing way too late. Grazing here? I move my cows every day. Yep. It seems like, well, this is my first year doing it. I'm putting them in on way too rank of forage.
So the question was, what if we're on the other end of the scale and we're grazing here at late maturity rather than at mid-stage or even earlier maturity. So here's the answer. The epigenetic impact of that depends very heavily on the degree of plant species diversity.
If you have low diversity, then this is going to have a negative epigenetic impact to a certain degree. Now, however that being said, it is better than grazing here. Okay? It is definitely better than grazing here because you have a far better developed microbial population here than you do here.
But you can much more readily afford to do this and have a positive impact if you have greater plant species diversity. So the more diversity, the better you're able to utilize grazing along this continuum of the scale.
Make sense? So some things that I call too big to ignore, working again with this whole BRICS idea, stage of maturity of your forage when grazed, and the timing of your daily moves. So when should we be moving for optimum animal performance and optimal epigenetic impact?
Late afternoon. Afternoons. Afternoons rather than the mornings. So we should be making our moves in the afternoons rather than the mornings. And what did we say about the stage of maturity of the forages?
Between mid-level and later. Between mid-stage and later. Absolutely. Between mid-stage and later. Okay. If we pay attention to these two things, we can increase average daily gain in cattle between a quarter and a half pound per head per day just by doing those two things.
We hadn't added any input cost whatsoever. We hadn't changed anything else that we do just by those two things. So again, some very critical grazing tips for, and this is no matter what species you've got out there grazing, sheep, cattle, dairy cattle, even pigs foraging on pasture, chickens foraging on pasture.
Know your dry matter availability and allow all your species to consume about 3 to 3.5% of their body weight and dry matter per day. Don't let them take more than 30 to 50 percent of the available dry matter in a single grazing event.
You don't want them taking too many bites off the same plant. It's good to know that bricks content so you can graze accordingly. Turn into new paddocks in early to mid-afternoon and again the stage of the forage maturity, mid-stage to slightly beyond.
Okay, selecting genetics for forage-based production. Here's the keys, folks. First and foremost, longevity. Any breeding herd or flock, period, any breeding herd or flock, that's the number one trait.
Not some EPD, not some DNA marker, not an EBV, not the pedigree, none of that. If you want to make real money and have the highest level of net profitability in any kind of livestock operation where you're breeding animals.
Now, if you were just a feed or pig operation, you didn't have sows, all of that, or if you were just a stocker operation in cattle or whatever, then maybe you wouldn't consider longevity important. But if you're a breeding operation of any kind and you want real net profitability, longevity is it, folks.
Bar none. Longevity. Then up underneath that, fertility, soundness, and adaptability. So they've got to have high fertility. They've got to be sound in the feet and legs, the eyes, the udders and teeth and the teeth.
Now for most species to do that, particularly to do it out on pasture, that means low to moderate milk. We don't need high milking beef cattle, and we really don't need even dairy cattle milking as high as they do.
That's been to huge detriment of the dairy industry, as a matter of fact. They must be highly adapted to their environment. We're going to talk a lot about all of this. In beef cattle, that means moderate frame.
In terms of BIF frame score, height at the hip, bulls 52 to 46, cows 48 to 52. They've got to have depth, thickness, gut capacity, and survive and thrive without all the props. And we provide a ton of props today, don't we?
A lot of props. But every one of those props does what? It cost us money. A lot. Exactly. So, to reiterate the four most important traits of any species of livestock that's a breeding herd or flock. Longevity, adaptability, fertility, soundness.
But what have you been taught? What have you been taught? What kind of tools do you use for selection? EPDs? We're going to talk about those in a little bit. What else? The what? I was thinking like how they look if you show them pictures.
Okay. Big animals or heavy weaning weight. How they look, big animals, heavy weaning weight. More milk. Okay, we've been taught pounds pay the bills, right? Right, pounds per individual animal, but it's really pounds per acre, isn't it, that pays the bills.
It's pounds per acre or pounds per whatever your unit is that pays the bills, not individual animal weight or even individual animal milk production if you're a dairy. Okay, so let's talk about all those things.
What about EPDs? Now I'm a geneticist. I was involved in the 80s on the research and the development of EPDs. So I know exactly how they're calculated. I know all about them. But what about EPDs? How useful are they?
In those four traits I just described to you that determine ultimate profitability, how useful, really useful are EPDs? Not that much. What is the definition of progeny difference? Okay, very good question.
What is the definition of progeny difference? So basically, it's a formula using an algebraic equation that predicts based on data input from parents and other relatives what the progeny should be relative to their parents in any trait.
So weaning weight, birth weight, yearling weight, carcass traits, all of those types of things. So there's EPDs on each individual trait and they are supposed to predict if I mate this bull with this EPD to this cow with this EPD how my calf should perform based on those EPDs.
Now, do EPDs work to a certain extent in that regard? Yeah. Okay. Can EPDs be manipulated by seedstock breeders? Yes. Are EPDs manipulated by seedstock breeders? Yes, every day. I can take a high EPD bull on any given trait and manipulate based on who I breed him to and everything else to where I can tank his EPD and take a new young sire and I can dramatically increase his EPD.
So in other words, I can take an animal that I want to, you know, because in the seedstock business, it's always the newest, the latest, and the greatest animal, right? You don't want to keep promoting the same old animal forever and ever.
So they're always trying to build the newest and latest and greatest that's going to be the next million dollar bull or whatever. And so you can easily manipulate those EPDs to build a new one up and tear an old one down.
It's not hard to do this at all. It has to do with the data you report, who you breed them to, all of those other things. Even the environment that you're in can influence an EPD. So they're easily manipulated.
I can tell you today that as a geneticist, I don't know an EPD on a single bull that we have and don't care. I never look at them anymore, ever. They're of no use to me because I use these other factors that we're going to continue to describe and they are far, far more meaningful and profound in my genetic selection.
But what's the first word for an EPD? Expected. Expected. That first word isn't guaranteed, right? It's not a GPD, a guaranteed progeny difference. It's an expected progeny difference. But EPD, another fault of EPDs is that they're calculated on individual traits.
What happens when I focus on individual trait selection? Okay, overconcentration of that trait and we're going to make bad decisions. You know, most people, when they use EPDs, how do they think about using them?
You mean what they are selecting that hypothetically that bull for? Yeah, so let's just use weaning weight as one of the EPDs. So let's use a weaning weight EPD. So most breeders, when they think about using an EPD for weaning weight, what do they want to do?
Okay. Do you often hear them say, I want to be in the top 10% or 5% of the breed for EPDs for this trade or that trade? Right? Yep. So what happens when you select your breeding stock, your bulls and all of that, for EPDs that are in the top 10% or 5%?
You do what? Okay, so you influence size, a dramatic increase in size of those animals. But are there maybe genetic antagonisms among some of these traits as well? Yes. Yeah, so the question is, don't we limit our gene pool if we're doing more single trait selection?
And absolutely we do. Absolutely we do. So it's almost unavoidable. Our human tendency is if we're given a plethora of data, what do we want to do with all of that data? We want to pick and choose out of it only the measures we think are most important, right?
And then work with those. But also our tendency is if we try to work with the whole realm of data, we become overwhelmed and confused, don't we? And we start questioning ourselves and what we're doing.
So as a geneticist, we have actually taken what could have been a very good tool and we've turned it into a tool of confusion, a tool of misuse, and a tool of manipulation. And we have done more harm than good in our genetic breeding decisions because of trying to use EPDs.
Now does this... We have become the manipulator. Right. We have become the manipulator. That's right, sir. And so what happened is that we have confused ourselves in our own genetic selection decisions, and we have made certain traits to be of optimum importance that are far removed from the four most important traits I listed, right?
Like wean weight or yearling weight or any rib eye area size, all of those types of things. If I don't have longevity, adaptability, fertility, and soundness, none of the rest of that really matters.
I'm not going to be able to make money because I'm going to have to prop them up with expensive inputs. Same thing goes in pigs, sheep, chickens, goats. Doesn't matter what species of livestock. Same principles apply.
Breeding values are used in the dairy industry. So tell me what's happened in the dairy industry. What's happened there, folks, in the U.S. in the dairy? They have no fertility. Okay, the cows have no fertility, so that's one of the many things.
Okay, they've gotten a lot bigger. Let's go back to that fertility for just a moment. On the vast majority of our commercial dairy farms in the U.S., and they've gotten, as farms individually, they've gotten larger and larger, right?
Several thousand plus cows per dairy. What is their average preg rate today on most dairies? 40 or 50 percent, maybe. Okay, so 40, 50 percent, that's actually high. Many of them would kill to have 40 to 50 percent preg rate.
Most of their preg rates are in the 30s. Now, if you're a beef cattle operator, what would you consider that? A 30-35% preg rate? A failure or a disaster. Or a disaster, exactly. Okay, so it's more than a failure, it would be a disaster, right?
What about in breeding sows? What would you consider a 30 to 35 percent preg rate annually to be? Not good. Would you survive? No. Okay? So guys, I mean, think about that. But that's what they consider good.
Okay, so they've gotten larger and larger, which means they require higher and higher inputs to maintain them, right? What else? They're burning out like three years now or four, maybe. Okay, they're burning out in three to four years.
So do you know that the average number of lactations for a dairy, commercial dairy cow in the U.S. is 2.5 to 3? And then they're McDonald's. So the average lactation is 2.5 to 3. What else about them?
They're giants, right? What else about them? Terrible V issues. Okay, they've got a lot of feet and leg issues. Almost every one of these dairy, they have provided an excellent living to hoof trimmers.
Hoof trimmers make the route between all these big dairy farms every single week trimming cows' hooves. What else? Lameness. Lameness, which is part of the feet and leg problem. What else? What about somatic cell count issues?
What about mastitis? What about birthing difficulty, what they call DOAs, dead on arrivals? They have way too many calves that are born dead. Can most of these dairy cows even give birth without assistance anymore?
They don't even, many of them have lost the ability to be able to do a normal birthing process. Could these cows, do they even know how to raise their own calf? Now the calves are yanked away anyway, but would they even know how to raise their own calf?
No. So these cows have lost all natural tendencies and abilities. Is that genetic, guys? And epigenetic? You bet it is. You bet it is. So now we have a national herd in our dairies of cows that have serious and significant genetic and epigenetic problems.
Why? Because we're using breeding values to select predominantly for what? One thing. One thing. Fluid milk production. Right? Fluid milk production. What about DNA marker technology? That's sort of the latest and greatest, right?
And I've done this. I've done DNA analysis in the lab when I was with the university, so I've done all this. I know how to do it, but what about it? Is this the thing that turns the tide and allows us to be able to select the very best genetics now?
Or is it yet another way that is going to cause us to go down a very wrong path and create negative epigenetic effects? Basically, EPDs for crossbreds, ain't it? That's all they're using it is? The EPDs for crossbreds?
Basically, because you don't have EPDs on a crossbred cattle, so they're just giving you a scale of 1 to 10. As long as it has Angus influence, Neogen will give you the results. Okay, so as long as it has Angus influence, Neogen will give you results.
And you can go from there. And you can go from there. So what is DNA marker technology supposed to do? What's the premise behind it? Well, every organism that has a genetic component, and all organisms do, right?
Those genetic components are comprised of strands of DNA. And on those strands of DNA, you have base pairs coding for your genes or your traits, right? Okay? So with DNA marker technology, we're supposed to be able to, utilizing PCR analysis, polymerase chain reaction analysis, and all of those types of things, we're supposed to be able to take that and sort of SNP those different sections of DNA and analyze them and relate them back to specific economically important traits in our livestock,
right? But is anything really that simple? And in genetics, are we smart enough as geneticists to be able to identify every gene pair, every group of base pairs and DNA strands that actually influence any given trait?
No, we're not. No, we're not. It's sort of scientific arrogance to think that we are and that we can do that very well. The truth is there's so many different strands of DNA. So many different interactions between all of the genes in the genome of an organism and then the environmental infactors that play a role in how those genes express themselves.
It truly is the height of arrogance to think that we can go in there and with a high degree of accuracy be able to identify and snip this out and then make a develop a marker. This is going to lead us down yet another rabbit hole, guys.
It's going to lead us down another rabbit hole. Let me ask you another question. The majority of our genetic selection over the past several decades has been made based on what? Controlled laboratory settings.
Okay, controlled laboratory settings to a certain degree. You mean the end result? Well, and trying to achieve an end result? Well, we're always trying to achieve an end result, but when we make our genetic decisions, what is already wrong to begin with that we're not even considering in making those genetic decisions?
Our soil, that foundation that we started with, right? Okay? So in other words, we're making our genetic decisions, never considering the degraded state at which we're already operating. When we make our genetic decisions based on animals in a vertically integrated operation, we're never considering what's happening outside and how that influences anything, right?
We're only considering if we can have that controlled environment, right? Okay. Do you think that the state of our soil microbiome has a profound influence on the genetic decisions that we made and the epigenetic expression of that?
Yes. So in other words, if we improve our soils and we improve the microbiome and the ecosystem around our animals, how will that impact these genetic decisions and the results of those decisions? It would certainly improve them.
Okay, it should improve them dramatically. But here's the other thing, is that it flips our conventional scientific wisdom on its ear. So in other words, all the genetic selection we've been making for the last several decades becomes almost meaningless.
The things we think we know about genetic selection and about what animals are right for our environments, when we positively alter that soil microbiome, we have just flipped everything we thought we knew on its ear.
And it no longer is applicable. Do y'all realize the impact of that? You do away with a whole industry, several industries. Absolutely. You do away with several industries. They no longer are needed.
They're no longer needed. Exactly. But now those industries obviously don't want that to happen, right? Because their billions go away or they got to find another way to earn our input dollars. One of the two.
Progressive farmer doesn't believe in that all of a sudden wouldn't it? Progressive farmer doesn't believe in that? Probably not a lot. Probably not a lot. What about pedigrees? Useful, not useful. What do y'all think about using pedigrees as part of our genetic selection?
Well, if all the rest of it's flawed. So if all the rest of it's flawed, maybe there's flaws here. So I do use pedigrees a lot, but only after studying intensely what's in those pet, the individuals in those pedigrees, how they were raised, how they were produced, in the actual farms or ranches they were produced on.
And whether those farms or ranches are more regenerative or less regenerative, whether their soils are healthier or more degraded. So pedigrees are useful, but I got to consider all of that back data on it.
And a three-generation pedigree, that's sort of the standard pedigree today, right? A three-generation pedigree, you got to go back a lot further. So I go back at least, you know, six generations on pedigrees.
And when we get into line breeding, we'll talk a lot more about that. What about linear measurement? How many have heard of linear measurement? Done linear measurement? Okay. Okay. You know, there's all kinds of linear measurements.
I mean, a hip height is a linear measurement. A scroll to circumference is a linear measurement. Heart girth is a linear measurement. All of those are linear measurements. Can they be useful? Yeah. But you've got to know your context, what you're selecting for, the environment that you're selecting for, all of that to know if linear measurement hat fits in.
Is it the same from breed to breed to breed? Nope. Nope. Okay, there can be differences between breeds in terms of the ratios between those linear measurements. So what about ultrasound data, like live animal carcass ultrasound data?
Yeah, for determining marbling, for determining rib eye area, for determining back fat. Maybe tenderness. I mean, that would be real time. So if there was a cow in front of me and I'd get the ultrasound, I'd know it's body fat.
Okay, so the question is, wouldn't that be real time? And the answer is, yes, it is real-time data. Okay. So ultrasound data can actually be, or carcass, live animal carcass ultrasound data, can actually be pretty important and very useful.
And we do use it ourselves a lot. We do a lot of this. And I used to do a ton of research in this area as well. But are there cautions? Yes. Yes. Can you misuse it just like all of this other stuff? Yes, you can misuse it.
You can place too much importance on it. So, in other words, for an animal to be selected based off of its ultrasound data, that animal must also first measure up longevity, adaptability, soundness, fertility in their lineage.
If they do, then I can place more importance on the ultrasound data. But if I'm using this without considering those others, I've just made a big mistake. A very big mistake.
