The genetic balance 

Cattlemen often ask, “But if I select for that much marbling, what will it do to my cow herd?”

For Randall Spare, veterinarian with the Ashland (Kan.) Veterinary Center, it’s not an either/or choice.

“We can have it all, people. I would encourage you to think about when we look at marbling,” he says. 

Spare shared results from herds using genomic technology to help them cut the bottom 20% and move the results of the whole population.  

Sometimes that means rethinking nutrition and environmental constraints.

“I see our clients do that every day: they chose to use the management resources to make money,” Spare explained. 

Conveying that investment in genetics to the next segment has historically been a challenge, but a feeders panel discussed ways they use that information today. Tom Fanning, Pratt Feeders; Grant Morgan, Pokey Feeders; and Troy Marshall, American Angus Association director of commercial industry relations, talked about tools from genomic testing to the AngusLink^SM Genetic Merit Scorecard^SM that give feeders more information about the cattle coming into their yards. 

“If they’ve got great genetics, then what we can do is we can leave them there or we can mess it up, and that last part gets really expensive,” Fanning said. 

Knowing ahead of time which pens can stay on feed longer without incurring discounts can make or break the final closeout — something that became very clear during the long-fed markets during the pandemic.

Marshall said the scorecard is an easy tool that allows for that data flow without having to study pedigrees, making it more readily available to make decisions on. 

“I think having the information to incorporate genetics into our management and marketing protocols is really the key to profitability,” he said. 
Yet, the key components of the profitability equation are different than they were decades ago, and the industry knows more about the biology of cattle than ever before. 

Consulting nutritionist Pete Anderson, Midwest PMS, told the audience to rethink the way they calculate when to sell cattle. Regardless of whether the cattle are sold live or on a carcass basis, that carcass cost of gain (COG) is an important number.

“Very simple profitability increases until the incremental cost of gain exceeds the sale price,” he said, urging the audience to think about it in 10-day increments. 

In most cases, as quality grade increases, the premiums make up for waste fat that’s added. 

“Yield grade premiums are nice, but they don’t drive what your grid results. It’s all about quality,” he said. 

Justin Gleghorn, Cactus Feeders, and A.J. Tarpoff, Kansas State University, talked technology — everything from growth to management types — in the feedyard. On one hand, government regulations are narrowing how cattle feeders can use certain implants. But on the other, there are new uses for tools such as virtual fencing, monitoring systems and drones.

“Cactus is a very pro-technology organization. We look for opportunities to utilize new technologies and put them into production as quick as we can,” Gleghorn said. 

The Texas-based cattle feeding company does extensive research with its own internal team on anything it’s about to implement. But that’s an investment in time they’re willing to make because of the effect on the overall business.  

“We can go out there and find opportunities to increase margin or capitalize on efficiencies. That gives us what we believe is buying power out there in the feeder market,” Gleghorn said.

The packer perspective  

Being competitive in marketplace is top of mind for Chad Barker, vice president of cattle procurement at National Beef, as they look to sell as much CAB and Prime as possible. 

To solidify its commitment to quality, National recently announced a $5-per-head premium for all cattle that come into its plants with an AngusLink Genetic Merit Scorecard Beef Score of 100 or greater.  

“We spend just as much time forecasting grade with our production scheduler as I do about anything, because he’s putting availability out to all of our sales guys and they’re trying to sell that product,” Barker says. 

Having more predictability in how those cattle will grade empowers those marketing it down the line. He noted the first loads to go to harvest in this new arrangement reached 75% CAB and Prime.

“It can be accomplished, and those are the kind of cattle we want to try to attract,” Barker said. 

Packers are using more data and technology on the buying side of the equation, but also once those cattle are harvested, too. 

A trio of experts — Abram Babcock, Adams Land & Cattle; Glen Dolezal, Cargill Protein; Derek Vote, consultant — spoke on the evolutions in objective grading systems. They noted all major packing plants in the United States are now using camera-based grading, with oversight by the USDA.

“It’s extremely important that we get accurate, consistent data back from that because we use that information to purchase external cattle,” Babcock said. “What we see is, with the camera, a very consistent outcome as far as that removes some of the subjectivity.”

The human oversight is important in calling cooler, he said. 

Dolezal and Vote noted the cameras are ever improving, as data helps retrain the algorithms as the technology improves. 

Dale Woerner, Texas Tech University, explained the quality grade evaluation isn’t the only carcass measure getting a second look on how it’s measured. The yield grade (YG) equation, today’s standard for predicting red meat yield, was based on one study on an old population of cattle, and it misses the mark.  

“Ribeye area alone only explains 3% of the total variation in true red meat yield coming from these carcasses,” said Dale Woerner. “We have to begin to transition our mindset.”

He shared options currently in development to get 3-D imaging on carcasses. New technology that does a better job accurately assessing red meat yield is important. 

As breeders think about making genetic change, it needs to be based on good data, he said.

“The easiest way to get to greater feed efficiency and efficiency in our industry is to increase muscularity and better measurement tools, and better feedback of information back to producers is ultimately what we need to do that,” Woerner added. 

The beef industry has a history of letting data help steer its course. Bob Smith, Veterinary Research Consulting Services LLC, closed out the program talking about the improvements the National Beef Quality Audits and Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) programs have stewarded through the decades.  

“I view the Beef Quality Assurance program as not something that’s a single event,” Smith said, noting injection site lesions are almost a thing of the past and the quality grade has skyrocketed to meet consumer demand. “It is an evolution, not necessarily a revolution; and it is a continual improvement through the years.”

Watch for continuing in-depth coverage on many of these presentations in the Angus Beef Bulletin or the Angus at Work podcast. To view presentations or for more information, visit www.FeedingQualityForum.com.