Iowa Farmer Today
04-01-06
Beef producers map genetic improvement
By Hannah Fletcher, Iowa Farmer Today
BRIDGEWATER -- Dave Nichols’ genetic test scores might eventually come
back with straight A’s in carcass quality, cattle health and healthier beef.
For about seven years, Nichols has been working with genetic researchers. He
has been sending samples of his beef cattle to genetic-technology companies to
identify DNA markers for marbling and tenderness, which will improve and speed
his selection process.
“The beef industry needs markers the most,” said Nichols, chairman of the
National Beef Cattle Evaluation Consortium advisory board.
He said improvements in genetic selection are particularly important because the
traditional method for improving a beef herd is lengthy. Hogs and poultry can
change generations much faster than cattle.
Calvin Gunter, Bovigen corporate development director, said beef producers
were initially slow to adopt a test his company in Metairie, La., offers. The
Genestar test checks cattle samples for tenderness and marbling.
But, in the past three months, participation has more than doubled, he said.
Gunter said customers initially identified price as a deterrent. So, Bovigen has
improved efficiency and lowered costs by about $100 per head since it began
using the test two years ago.
It now runs about $65 per head. Results are sent to producers in about one
business week, he said.
“At this point in time, it tends to be the more-progressive producers,” Gunter said.
“A lot of the older folks have more time and finances, and have adopted this
more readily.”
Customers often begin by testing their bulls or a few A.I. sires, he said, noting,
“Most people step in slowly.”
The disconnect between identifying carcass quality and receiving a premium
could be slowing the adoption of genetic testing, said James Reecy, Iowa State
University animal science professor.
“We need to figure out how you get prices for proven carcass quality and get
those premiums equated to producers,” he said.
“We all say we should be improving genetics. But, without the prices to back it
up, there is little incentive.”
Genetic markers for marbling and tenderness are only the beginning for better
quality and prices for the beef industry, he said.
Reecy and other researchers are working to identify cattle health and meat
healthfulness phenotypes.
They have found some animals are naturally resistant to infections, such as pink
eye and respiratory disease, and are working to identify those DNA markers.
Also, researchers hope to identify traits for feed efficiency.
It is not only cattle health researchers are concerned with, Reecy said.
They also are identifying beef with healthy fatty acids, such as conjugulated
linoleic acid (CLA). They also are looking for markers for undesirable
components, such as cholesterol and saturated fat, hoping to reduce their
prominence in the herd.
Reecy said researchers will be careful to make sure these markers for health
don’t interfere with quality.
“We don’t want to change the quality of the product,” he said. “(Researchers) will
work with food science people at the same time to see what happens to mouth
appeal, taste and quality.”
Improving the health of beef will dispel rumors about its less-healthy qualities,
Reecy noted.
“There is already healthy beef out there. We’re hoping to change the fat
composition so it is better.”
In the next 10-15 years, producers will be testing for these traits and will begin to
see improvements in fat composition and premium prices, Reecy said.
“It’s going to be the early adopters that will benefit at first,” he added.
Eventually, Nichols hopes his herd’s DNA results will come back with information
beyond carcass merit.
“What’s really exciting is what we will be able to select for in the future,” he said.
“This is going to dramatically change the beef industry.”