Welcome to the Bullvine Podcast.
I'm Bella and I'm joined today by my co-host Douglas.
Today we're tackling a question that's been on my mind with the upcoming April 20-25 genetic
evaluation updates.
Can genomic selection eliminate luck in dairy breeding?
Thanks Bella.
It's a fascinating topic, especially as we approach these significant changes to the
evaluation system.
We'll be exploring how some of Holstein's most influential bloodlines emerged not from
careful planning, but from happy accidents, what I like to call lucky breaks.
We'll also discuss what current research tells us about the limitations of genomic
selection and how today's breeders can balance scientific precision with openness to serendipity.
Douglas, whenever I visit dairy farms these days, the conversation inevitably turns to
genomic selection, advanced mating programs, and all these impressive reproductive technologies.
It seems like we're in an era where science has taken over breeding decisions.
You're right, Bella.
The industry has been transformed by these tools.
And with the April 20-25 genetic evaluation updates approaching, featuring revised lifetime
merit indices, and that shift to the 2020 genetic base, some folks might think we've
removed chance from the equation entirely.
I've been reading the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding announcements.
They're projecting some major decreases in predicted transmitting ability values, right?
Negative 750 pounds of milk, negative 45 pounds of fat, and negative 30 pounds of protein
for Holsteins.
That sounds concerning at first glance.
Chuck Sattler from Select Sires explained, the 2025 base change is bigger than previous
adjustments, but this is good news.
It means that our cows are improving faster than ever.
What's happening is that the entire breed is making such rapid progress that we need
to recalibrate our measurement scale.
So despite all this precision, I have to ask, have we really eliminated luck from breeding
or have we just gotten better at working with it?
That's the million dollar question, Bella.
And to answer it, we need to look at both what science tells us and what history has
shown us.
Let me share something fascinating from recent research from the National Center for Biotechnology
Information.
Even our most advanced genomic prediction tools show only about 75% reliability for
production traits.
Wait, only 75%?
That means a full quarter of what makes a cow productive remains outside our ability
to predict.
Exactly.
And this 75% reliability has been consistent for years.
A 2011 study in the Journal of Dairy Science noted this level is adequate for marketing
semen of two-year-old bulls, but it's far from perfect.
The primary benefit has been a shortened generation interval that increases the rate of genetic
improvement, not perfect prediction.
So we should be thinking about that 25% gap whenever we make breeding decisions.
It's not just a small margin of error.
It's a significant space where luck, chance, and unexplained genetic interactions still
play a major role.
Absolutely.
Now, to really understand how luck has shaped our breed, let's look at some remarkable
historical examples.
I've heard there are some amazing stories about chance events that created legendary
Holstein bloodlines.
Can you share some of these with our listeners?
I'd love to.
I've spent decades in this industry, and these stories never cease to amaze me.
Let's start with what I call the case of the missing telephone.
The missing telephone.
This sounds intriguing.
Back in the early 1900s, A.J.
Lashbrook and his brother sold some inherited shares from their grandfather's estate for
$250 to invest in Holstein cattle.
Their father visited Springbrook Farm and spotted three beautiful heifer calves priced
at $75 each.
$75 each.
That's incredible compared to today's prices.
Yes, but here's where it gets interesting.
The Lashbrooks didn't have a telephone to confirm the purchase immediately.
According to the historical record, they couldn't skip school that day, so their father had
to return the next day.
When he arrived, he found that the calves had already been sold to George Miller.
Oh no, talk about bad timing.
It turns out that Schilling, the Springbrook farm manager, had mentioned the calves to
the owner of the local feed mill who told Miller.
And one of those calves was Springbrook best Burke.
Miller raised her, bred her to Sir Johanna Canary DeKal, and later sold her to F.C. Schroeder
of Moorhead, Minnesota.
So what happened to this cow after she went to Schroeder's farm?
Under Schroeder's ownership, best Burke and her daughter made remarkable production records
when mated to Sir Peter Chi Ormsby Mercedes.
Years later, Lashbrook reflected, and I love this quote, as I look back now, it was indeed
fortunate that we did not have a telephone and that those calves never came to our farm.
We were only small breeders and probably never would have developed those cows.
He aced all.
So he actually thought it was better that they missed out on buying her.
Yes, because here's the kicker.
Without that missing telephone, there would have been no Osborne Dale Ivanhoe, no Round
Oak Rag Apple Elevation, no Hanover Hill Starbuck, and no Mattawaska Aerostar.
Can you imagine modern Holstein genetics without those bulls?
That's incredible.
One missing telephone call reshaped the entire breed.
Do you have more examples like this?
Absolutely.
Let me tell you about the luckiest injured leg in Holstein history.
This sounds like another chance event with big consequences.
F.C. Whitney had purchased a bull named Montvic Chieftain from T.B. McCauley.
But when they were loading the bull onto the truck, Chieftain slipped and injured his leg.
Oh, no poor bull.
But here's where luck steps in.
McCauley called Whitney and offered him Montvic Pathfinder for the same price.
Now, Pathfinder wasn't what you'd call handsome.
Whitney actually described him as as homely a brute as a man ever saw.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement.
No, but his pedigree was exceptional with multiple All-American winners.
Many claimed he possessed the best pedigree ever written, including four All-American
wins to his credit, including Aged Cow in 1935 and 1936.
So Whitney decided to take a chance on this ugly duckling.
Exactly.
At his farm in New York, Pathfinder sired Montvic Pathfinder Prize Taker.
This bull was later purchased by Charles Hope for Round Oak Farm.
And through this lineage emerged Round Oak Rag Apple Elevation, one of the most influential
Holstein sires of all time.
So if Chieftain hadn't injured his leg, we might never have had elevation.
That's right.
One sore leg changed the entire trajectory of Holstein genetics.
These stories are fascinating, Douglas.
But I'm curious, what does the current research tell us about genomic selection and its limitations?
A 2020 study published by the National Center for Biotechnology Information found something
remarkable.
Inbreeding can significantly impact how well genomics works as a prediction tool.
How so?
The study examined high-producing first lactation dairy cows and found that individuals with
an inbreeding index between 2.5 and 5.0 showed up to a two-fold increase in negative correlations
between genomic predictions and actual performance.
In simpler terms, what does that mean for farmers?
It means that even with perfect genomic tools, factors like inbreeding can significantly
reduce the accuracy of our predictions.
Your carefully selected mating might produce unexpected results, positive or negative,
based on genetic interactions our current models simply can't predict.
It sounds like genomics gives us a much better map, but the territory still has unexplored
areas.
That's an excellent metaphor, Bella.
Let me share two more historical examples that highlight how unexpected events created
breeding success.
Here's a story that always makes me smile.
Back in September 1942, Doug Dutton had visitors.
Jack Fraser, Elgin Armstrong, and Cliff Chant had stopped by his farm to scout some cows
for Armstrong's ABC farm.
Okay, setting the scene.
What happened?
When they arrived, Dutton was walking up from the stable in his barn clothes and said, wait
a minute while I change my clothes.
While he went to the house, his visitors wandered down to the barn.
And I'm guessing they saw something important while he was changing.
Exactly.
In a box stall getting ready to calve was a big white cow named Temple Farm May.
Armstrong was impressed and bought her on the spot for $400.
And this cow turned out to be special?
She gave birth to ABC Inca May, who became an all Canadian four-year-old in 1947 with
an incredible production record.
24,141 pounds of milk, 4.67% butterfat, and 1,128 pounds of fat.
Those are remarkable numbers, especially for that era.
But her greatest achievement was as the dam of ABC reflection sovereign, who many claim
was the best bull the breed has produced.
If Dutton hadn't needed to change his clothes that day, or if the visitors had arrived at
a different time, they might never have noticed Temple Farm May.
One mazed, onege of clothes altered Holstein history forever.
These stories are incredible, Douglas.
I know many of our listeners have experienced this situation.
You call your AI technician with the perfect mating plan and they tell you they're out
of that bull semen.
Has this kind of situation ever created a lucky break in breeding history?
Absolutely.
One of the best examples involves a cow named Tiny Supreme Dickhole.
Aylmer Petherick had chosen Pabst Walker for Tiny's next mating, but when the inseminator
arrived he wasn't carrying Walker's semen.
So what happened?
Petherick simply asked, what else have you got?
And settled on Haynescrest Sovereign Tycoon instead.
The resulting calf was Almerson Sovereign Supreme, who went on to be classified Excellent
and received Class Extra rating, becoming one of the most respected bulls in Canadian
history.
He was highly regarded by leading breeders, including Pete Heffering and Dave Hauck.
What a great example of making the best of what's available.
And this still happens today.
With the April 2025 genetic base change coming up, we're going to see major bull re-rankings.
According to official CDCB announcements, the Net Merit Dollar Index is getting a serious
makeover.
Increased emphasis on butterfat with a 13% higher weighting, greater focus on feed efficiency
with a 41% higher combined impact, and doubled weighting for cow livability.
So your backup choice today might create tomorrow's influential bloodline, just like in the
last few years.
And we're going to see a lot of these historical examples.
Exactly.
All those genomic tools might guide your primary selections, but chance still decides whether
those straws are actually in your AI tank when you need them.
Let's talk more about the specific limitations of genomic selection.
When I talk with farmers, many believe these tools can predict everything about a calf's
potential.
That's a common misconception, Bella.
The general rule of dairy science, current reliability percentages for genomically tested
young animals typically hover between 65 and 75% for production traits, and even lower for
health and fertility traits.
So that means 25 to 35% of a cow's genetic potential remains completely unpredictable
through our current genomic models.
That's right.
And there are four main factors creating this uncertainty.
What are they?
First, gene interactions.
Genomic models struggle to capture how genes influence each other.
The same marker might perform differently depending on the overall genetic background.
Second, environmental influences.
How genes express themselves varies wildly in different environments.
I've seen genetically identical cows perform completely differently on neighboring farms.
That makes sense.
What are the other factors?
Third is genetic recombination.
Even with identical parents, each calf gets a unique genetic package.
It's like shuffling a deck of cards.
You never deal the same hand twice.
And fourth, new mutations.
Sometimes genetic changes appear that weren't present in either parent, creating traits
nobody predicted.
So even with our best technology, there's still a significant element of unpredictability
in breeding outcomes.
Exactly.
This isn't to diminish the value of genomic selection.
It's revolutionized our industry.
But understanding its limitations helps us maintain a realistic approach to breeding
decisions.
I'd like to shift to the financial side of things, Douglas.
Despite these limitations, is genomic testing still a good investment for dairy farmers?
Absolutely, Bella.
Recent industry analyses suggest that genomic testing of heifers delivers approximately
$75 to $200 in additional lifetime profit per animal tested, primarily through improved
selection decisions and optimized heifer inventory management.
That's a pretty wide range from $75 to $200.
What factors influence where a farm might fall on that spectrum?
Several key factors come into play.
Current replacement costs in your area, your herd's genetic level relative to the breed,
how aggressively you cull based on genomic results, and whether you use sexed or beef
semen strategically.
So despite the uncertainty we've discussed, the ROI on genomic testing is still solidly
positive.
Yes, but I should emphasize that the unpredictable 25 to 30% of genetic potential means some
animals will significantly underperform or overperform their genomic predictions.
This variability creates both risk and opportunity.
Sometimes your lowest ranked genomic heifer produces your best cow.
Ask any experienced breeder and they'll have at least one story like this.
As we approach the April 2025 genetic evaluation updates, what specific changes should our
listeners be preparing for?
According to the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding, the April 2025 updates include two significant
changes, revised lifetime merit indices and a genetic base change.
The genetic base will shift to cows born in 2020, which is why we're seeing those major
PTA decreases for Holsteins that you mentioned earlier.
So what specific changes to the net merit index should farmers be aware of?
Based on CDCB and USDA ARS reports, the net merit dollar index is getting a significant
makeover.
There's increased emphasis on butterfat.
The weight for fat in net merit dollars has increased from 28.6 to 31.8, while protein
weight has actually decreased from 19.6 to 13.
It's a C. That's a pretty substantial shift.
What's driving these changes?
According to the USDA Agricultural Research Service, these adjustments reflect evolving
market demands and research advancements.
There's also an enhanced focus on feed efficiency, component-based milk pricing and fertility.
The calculations show a correlation of 0.992 between the April 2025 and current formulas,
which means we shouldn't see major re-ranking for most animals.
So these changes might actually create opportunities to spot hidden gems that our current systems
might be undervaluing.
Exactly.
This re-ranking creates a golden opportunity to identify animals that might have been overlooked
under the current system, but will shine under the new indices.
So with all this in mind, what strategies would you recommend to our listeners as they
prepare for the April 2025 genetic evaluations update?
I have four key recommendations based on my decades in the industry and the latest information
from CDCB and USDA.
First, get familiar with the changes.
Take time to understand the revised lifetime merit indices and that base change shift to
cows born in 2020.
According to ABS Global, the base change highlights that genetic progress continues to be made
since this is the most progress between a base change ever.
Your genetic selection decisions should remain focused on your milk market, facility, management
system and operational goals.
That makes sense.
Staying informed is always the first step.
Second, don't put all your eggs in one genomic basket.
I've noticed the industry focusing on an increasingly narrow range of elite genetics.
Consider incorporating some differently bred Holstein cattle that offer unique genetic
contributions.
Genetic diversity provides more opportunities for those unexpected combinations that sometimes
create magic.
So maintaining genetic diversity isn't just good for the breed.
It could also benefit individual farmers by increasing their chances of a lucky break.
Exactly.
Third, build flexibility into your program.
What's your plan B when your first choice matings aren't possible?
Those backup plans sometimes produce better results than the original.
Avoid getting trapped in the mindset that there's only one right mating for each animal.
And your fourth recommendation.
Trust your eyes, not just the numbers.
While genomic testing provides incredibly valuable data, don't lose that breeder's
instinct.
The best operations I visit combine quantitative assessment with qualitative judgment.
They use both the printout and that indefinable cow sense.
That's excellent advice, Douglas.
It's about finding the right balance between scientific precision and openness to serendipity.
We've covered so much ground today.
We've seen how chance events like the missing telephone that led to Springbrook, Best Berk
sale, Montvic Chieftain's injured leg that brought Pathfinder to America, and a simple
change of clothes that created ABC Reflection Sovereign have shaped Holstein history in
profound ways.
We've also looked at current research showing that even with genomic selection, 25 to 35%
of genetic potential remains unpredictable.
And we've discussed practical strategies for breeders to navigate the upcoming April 2025
genetic evaluation updates.
If there's one thing I hope our listeners take away from today's discussion, it's this.
Use every scientific tool at your disposal, but keep your eyes open for those unexpected
opportunities that genomics can't predict.
The history of Holstein breeding shows us that luck creates opportunities, but only
those with the knowledge and vision to recognize potential can transform those opportunities
into lasting genetic contributions.
The genetics have not changed, and the animals themselves have not changed.
What has changed is how we view an animal's genetic superiority.
Healing, we'd love to hear your lucky break breeding story.
Has a random breeding decision or unexpected mating ever produced something extraordinary
in your herd?
Share your story with us on the Bullvine website or tag us on social media with hashtag B-U-L-L-V-I-N
lucky breaks.
Until next time, keep one eye on the data and the other open to the possibilities that
might just lead to your herd's next great success story.
Thanks for listening to the Bullvine Podcast.
We'll see you next time.