CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO HIS PRESENTATION

You will need Windows Media Player to listen in.
Click here to download a free version.

Today’s beef industry is demanding cow-calf producers concern themselves with all parts of the beef production system. No longer can cow-calf producers worry only about cow-herd costs and calf production. They also must be considerate of the feedlot, packing and retail phases to satisfy the beef consumer. Multiple-trait selection and total quality management (TQM) now have increased the responsibility of the cow-calf manager’s role in tomorrow’s beef production.
I cannot think of three other factors that will have a greater economic impact on beef production than pounds, product and pregnancy. Those producers who are very proficient at producing all three will be successful; those who cannot will have a cloudy future. Managers who become proficient in one or two of these areas may survive, but top-notch managers will master all three areas (see Table 1).
Profit is the true driver for genetic and management direction. Net profits will rise only if a balance between product quality or value and cow-herd production can be achieved. Cow-herd profitability will continue to be greatly influenced by

	• reproductive rates;
	• calf survivability and growth; and
	• cow maintenance costs.

Increased price discovery will be achieved by producing a high-quality product. Now that value-based marketing (VBM) is a reality, carcass traits — such as marbling, percent retail yield and carcass weight — will increase in importance when making breeding decisions. The realization soon becomes that the perfect beast is one that does all things well. Cows must complement their environment, calves must grow efficiently, and carcasses must yield the ideal end products.

Making pounds of red meat
Genetic selection, natural resources and management dictate the amount of red meat harvested from an operation. Natural resources will always be variable and will demand the right kind of cattle graze under its influence. The efficient, forage-converting mama cows that calve easily, nurse their young and breed back quickly will always be the right type to own.
Commercial cattlemen must consider the advantages of utilizing the principles of heterosis. For years, research has shown the added benefits heterosis can generate in terms of cow efficiency and calf production. However, breeding programs that do not practice disciplined crossbreeding principles soon lose their advantages in heterosis and become less productive than any of the parent strains.
Factors that directly affect the pounds of beef a cow herd produces are calf age, milk production, health, growth genetics and forage availability. Getting cows bred in tight groups is paramount to producing uniform, consistent calf crops. The age spread in a calf crop can easily translate into a 120-pound (lb.) difference, even within a short 60-day calving season.
Research indicates a positive correlation exists between weaning weight and milk production of dams. However, excessive milk production or growth potential (genetics) can cause a mismatch of cows’ maintenance requirements and forage resources (see Table 2), thus limiting calf weaning weight, reducing reproductive performance and increasing culling rates.
Reviewing a recent three-year period of breed association data, it appears that 2- and 3-year-olds can account for up to 40% of all females culled. Feedlot production system data indicate that sick cattle not only lose growth performance but also fail to achieve the same levels of carcass attributes as their contemporaries (see Table 3).
Few studies concerning age of castration can be found in the literature; however, two trials were found, and both indicate that late castration decreases marbling score and hinders carcass quality grade (see tables 4 and 5).
The beauty of making genetic selections today is the ability to use advanced decision-making tools, like expected progeny differences (EPDs). Real progress can now be made because of the National Cattle Evaluation (NCE) databases that have been employed by the American Angus Association. Selecting for growth traits can be as easy as a simple sire search with built-in genetic parameters.
Sire sorting with searches will not only get us the bulls we need but also the bulls we can afford. In the future, the system will be refined to include economic data, and selection indexes will establish the bulls that are best for each operation. The limiting step in using a selection-index system is the lack of information about most cow herds. Until the strengths and weaknesses of a particular cow herd are known, the best genetic selections are almost impossible to make.

Producing product quality
When preparing for tomorrow’s beef cattle production, the importance of product quality quickly becomes apparent. One could conceive that the beef industry would become two distinct segments — the production of commodity beef and the production of “branded product-identity” beef. Fundamentally, this means that cow-calf producers would dictate the direction of outputs through genetic selection and product documentation.
Thus, genetic selection and management for carcass traits is focused almost entirely on the cow-calf producers and cattle feeders. Those who opt for the commodity beef route will have to be extremely cost-conscious. There will be little room for frills and added production costs as the dominant players will be the most cost-efficient producers of red meat. Price discounts will rule their marketing worlds.

On the other hand, those who work within a branded product-identity system will have more latitude in production efficiency. Premiums and discounts will govern their marketing world. There will be incentives to get better and not just leaner.
Genetic selection for improved carcass traits is a complicated, ongoing process. The Association has boldly established subsidiaries and databases that have greatly aided and advanced the selection processes. History shows a major emphasis has been placed in the area of efficient production (growth traits), and genetic trends easily document the progress.
However, improvement in carcass traits has been less consistent because of two major obstacles. First, a marketing system had to be adapted that would identify differences in carcass traits and place economic incentives for those carcass traits. Second, a communication network had to be invented that would establish databases and genetic knowledge. Both of these problems have been addressed by the beef industry, and real progress is being made.
Like other traits, marbling is controlled by genes. The genes for marbling are present in all beef populations but at differing frequencies (see Table 6). Therefore, genetic selection is needed to optimize the frequency of the marbling genes within population subsets (see tables 7 and 8).
Studies have measured the differences in marbling both between and within breed populations. It can be concluded that Bos taurus have a greater frequency of marbling genes than Bos indicus breeds. Among the Bos taurus breeds, it appears that British breeds are superior to Continental breeds in marbling ability.
Furthermore, adequate differences in breeding values for marbling exist within particular breeds. This enables cattle producers to “breed in” the marbling potential needed to meet their marketing objectives.
Once the genetic makeup of an animal is set, the expression of marbling becomes a function of the environment and management. In other words, no amount of feed or days on feed will express more marbling than is genetically possible. Work done at Oklahoma State University (OSU) indicates that marbling will plateau with extended days on feed (see Table 9). Other work done at the Western Kansas Agricultural Research Center, located near Hays, will clearly support the OSU findings.
Management of nursing calves can affect their carcass traits. Studies have shown that early weaning can improve marbling scores (see Table 10). Many ranches are not equipped to handle extremely small calves (90- to 110-day-old calves), but most facilities that can handle 500- and 600-weight weaned calves can be easily adapted to handle 300- and 400-lb. stock.
One major concern of early weaning is animal health. It appears, however, that early weaning does not negatively affect calf sickness or death loss.
A recently published study by Schoonmaker et al. (2001) has indicated that early-weaned calves can be aggressively implanted to improve feedlot performance, yet that will not decrease the intramuscular fat content of the carcass.
For some Angus producers, the most important carcass trait is not marbling — it is percent retail product. Cattle that can “do it all” will have the most profit potential, not those that excel in only one carcass trait.
Carcass value is a combination of weight, retail yield and quality grade. Extremes in any one trait may be necessary for genetic reach, but they will never be rewarded by meat purveyors. Just as we need cattle to grade, we need them to cut well.
Today’s standard of Yield Grade (YG) 3 will give way to YG 2 carcasses. This improvement in red meat yield is necessary and predicted by the National Beef Quality Audits (NBQAs) completed during the past decade. Today’s ideal carcass is not going to be the ideal carcass of tomorrow. The change will not be a revolution but, rather, an evolution (unless you have been living under a rock).
DNA will become more than a research project. It will be a database with unbelievable potential. Even though the development of DNA technology has been ongoing for several years, its application is still sometime in the future.
Because of the positive relationship between marbling and overall fat accumulation, there appears to be an antagonism between marbling and cutability across and within some breeds. Several studies using other breeds and crossbred cattle verify this statement.
A recent serial ultrasound study supports classic findings that external fat is deposited at a more rapid rate than marbling. From this we would conclude that it is not advantageous to feed marbling into the cattle through extra days on feed. The perceived increased percentage of Certified Angus Beef® (CAB®) carcasses is not the case, as superior marbling scores would be more than offset by an increase of YG 4s.
The American Angus Association has reported a minimal correlation between marbling and percent retail product. This should be comforting to Angus breeders, as it allows them to more freely select for both quality and quantity of red meat. Because of the size and scope of the Angus database, individuals within the population can be identified and used that will make genetic progress in these two traits simultaneously.

Getting cows pregnant
Body condition score (BCS), parity and days postpartum at the onset of the breeding season determine the proportion of cows that have initiated first postpartum ovarian activity and ovulated before the start of the breeding season. The factor that most limits early impregnation of suckled beef cows is the proportion of cows that are not cycling (anestrous) at the beginning of the breeding season.
Continual presence of a suckling calf prolongs anestrus and delays the start of estrous cycles. Although insufficient energy and protein intake and insufficient body condition at calving are also limiting factors, temporary or permanent weaning of the calf usually initiates estrus within a few days. Younger cows nursing calves generally have more prolonged anestrus because of their additional growth requirement.
Nutrients are used by cows according to an established priority. The priority is maintenance of essential body functions to preserve life. Once the maintenance requirement is met, remaining nutrients accommodate growth. Finally, lactation and initiation of estrous cycles are supported.
Because older cows have no growth requirements, nutrients are more likely to be available for milk synthesis and estrous-cycle initiation. Because of this priority system, young, growing cows generally produce less milk and are anestrous longer after calving.
As body condition increases, the percentage of cows cycling increases in a linear fashion. Research indicates that, for every unit increase of body condition (between the range of 1 to 7), the percentage of cows cycling increases by 18%. The literature indicates that beef cows should calve with a BCS of at least 5 to prevent prolonged anestrus after calving (see Table 12).
Cows may gain or lose body condition between calving and the beginning of the breeding season, depending on nutritional conditions, early grass growth and supplementation. Clearly, BCS are predictive of cycling activity.
Percentage cycling at the onset of most breeding seasons is less for first-calf 2-year-olds than that for older cows, even though the 2-year-olds calved two to three weeks earlier (see Table 13). The increased demand of growth and first lactation makes 2-years-olds the hardest age group to rebreed in a herd.
There are only two ways to compensate for the increased dietary requirements of first-calf heifers. Caretakers must increase the nutrient density of the diet or increase intake. With ruminants, these two factors go hand in hand because, as forage quality increases, so does intake.
Younger animals may appear to eat proportionally the same as mature animals on a body-weight basis, but when intake data is adjusted to a metabolic body-weight basis, mature cows are able to consume 27% and 50% more alfalfa and brome hay, respectively, per unit of metabolic body weight than 10-month-old heifers (see Table 14). The same trial notes that mature cows have improved ruminal digestion via increased fiber-degradation rates, thus explaining why mature cows are able to utilize low-quality forages to a greater extent than do younger, growing stock.
Because cows derive more total energy from their ruminal fermentation and have a lower maintenance-energy requirement than heifers, higher-quality diets are required for heifers than for cows to achieve acceptable performance.
Estrus status also can be influenced by days since calving (see Table 15). Percentage of cycling cows appears to increase linearly before reaching a peak around 70 days postpartum. This time frame may be a result of when precalving nutrition (body condition score) begins to lose its influence on reproductive functions and the postcalving nutritional program begins to control the return to cycling and fertility. A six-year study notes that, for every 10-day interval since calving (from <50 to 70 days), the percentage of cows cycling increased by 7.5%. Thus, early calving is critical because it allows more cows to be cycling by the start of the breeding season.
The most effective hormonal treatments to have cows express estrus during the first week of the breeding season are those that include both gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) and progestin as compared to GnRH alone or injection of prostaglandins (see Table 16). A greater proportion of cycling cows than anestrous cows (70% vs. 40%) show behavioral estrus early in the breeding season when synchronized with a combination of hormones.
In actuality, the percentage of anestrus cows that can be brought into heat is impressive. Prostaglandin alone will not induce anestrous cows into estrus, whereas norgestomet (progestin), Cystorelin (GnRH) or both successfully induce cycling activity in suckled cows. It also appears that progestins (MGA®) can induce cycling if fed continuously for eight to 14 days.
Recently, great interest has been given to feeding supplemental fat to young cows prior to calving, breeding or both to enhance reproduction (see Table 18). Researchers report inconsistent improvement in pregnancy rates when supplemental fat is used, but no reports have indicated a negative response to supplemental fat feeding. This makes it a plausible alternative when increased energy density in the diet is needed.

Summary
Beef consumers are demanding that all facets of beef production work together to ensure them of an enjoyable and affordable eating experience. Cow-calf producers set the stage for the rest of the beef production industry. Because they are the first step in the chain of beef production, their influence is felt throughout the entire system.
Sometimes it is important to take a history lesson. The following quote taken from a booklet entitled Progressive Beef Cattle Raising, published by Armour and Co. in 1920, sheds a degree of understanding about the right kind of cows we need.

“The cattle that are the best for beef are not best for milk or draft. Breeders in continental Europe have tried to combine in their cattle all of the traits that make animals useful for milk, beef and draft, but since many of the characters are antagonistic to each other, certain compromises in type have had to be made, which have rendered the animals less efficient for each of the special purposes.”

The best managers will wisely consider and implement all genetic and management decisions. If single-trait selection is foolishly employed, breeders quickly will realize the consequences of that type of breeding system. They will maximize the genetic progress of the selected trait, but other economically important traits will drift in different and undesirable directions.
Without the use of the sire summaries and mutiple-trait genetic selection, breeding cattle is too much like a crap shoot. Those breeders that practice multiple-trait selection will produce individuals that will weigh up, produce a high-quality product and reproduce.

home | conference schedule | tour schedule | conference speakers | hotel info