Bill Bowman is a Missouri farm boy who never imagined a career dealing with numbers—like the millions of data points in the American Angus Association’s database. Today he’s chief operating officer of the American Angus Association and president of Angus Genetics Inc. (AGI), a subsidiary of the Association. He oversees performance programs for the nation’s largest breed and cultivates the implementation of some sophisticated DNA technology.
Bowman puts his leadership of AGI this way: He doesn’t know all the intricacies of what makes a car run, but he can jump into his Buick and drive. He claims the same is true with the Association’s database, giving full credit to his cohort and in this case, chief mechanic, genetic director Sally Northcutt. Nevertheless, this former Beef Improvement Federation board member is one of the leaders in DNA technology transfer, so I decided to talk with him about the state of genetic predictions today.
Q. Although it’s been around for five years now, I’m not sure everybody fully understands what Angus Genetics Inc. is and what it does. First, why form another subsidiary?
A. It was created in 2007 with two main objectives: First, we saw universities had begun to pull back from providing service in the genetic evaluation realm and running EPDs (expected progeny differences). Our board had seen that coming and made provisions with computer technology and staff to bring all of that in-house by 2004.
With the expertise and ability to run those evaluations, we offered to provide that service to other organizations in North America. AGI currently runs evaluations for eight other breed organizations as well.
The second objective was to look at new technology, specifically genomics or DNA, and try to help drive some of the research and implementation. Our efforts focus on using that technology and incorporating it into genetic improvement.
Q. What was the status of DNA technology when AGI was created and what’s the state-of-state on that front now?
A. In reality, when AGI was created there were a few genomic tests available for some specific traits. They were very limited tests in terms of their efficacy and the number of markers they incorporated. The technology has just exploded over the last five years with new platforms, greater efficacy and reduced costs to run. Before we may have been trying to use three or four markers to evaluate marbling and today, in the seedstock business, we use the high-density 50K chip that would utilize over 50,000 “snips” - from SNPs, single-nucleotide polymorphisms. (Writer’s note: From this answer, we now know that he can at least pop the hood on that Buick and fiddle with the spark plug wires.)
It’s evolved tremendously, both from a technology standpoint and how we’re able to implement that into selection tools. Producers have developed an appreciation and ability to use EPDs and they understand the language and how to make genetic improvements using those. The American Angus Association, along with the Beef Improvement Federation, decided not to create another set of numbers and language. Instead we enhanced the EPDs with that genomic information, starting with carcass traits in the fall of 2009. That was really the first application of genomic technology into EPDs for multiple traits.
You don’t need to look at DNA results on an animal: it’s in the EPDs. Rather than say the DNA complements selection tools, the DNA tools have become another component of EPDs that help to improve their accuracy. In the Angus breed, we currently incorporate the information from genomic tests into nearly on all the traits on a weekly basis with that to improve the selection opportunities.
Q. What’s been the uptake of this technology within registered circles?
A. Our database today would contain over 17 million pedigrees. It has about 95,000 carcass records—harvested animals that have actual measurements from a plant—and about 1.4 million ultrasound records. By comparison, we’re running right about 25,000 DNA results and that’s all been since fall of 2009. It’s growing a lot.
I’ve used ultrasound as a good analogy. The first year, 1998, there was something like 3,000 or 3,500 animals in the ultrasound database. Within 10 years, we were doing 160,000 scans a year.
It’s not commonplace, it’s not widespread, but there are producers who have marketed their entire bull sale offering with genomic testing and its impact on the EPDs. It’s allowed people to provide young bulls that have higher accuracy, more information, into their EPDs. We take a yearling bull and if I have a DNA test on him combined with individual performance information, I’m probably getting that bull’s accuracy level up to that of a bull with 15 to 20 calves with progeny records turned in. You’re getting a more accurate glimpse of this animal’s genetics before he’s even become a parent.
It allows us to speed up the time interval on genetic improvement and reduce risk. It’s a good insurance policy. If I have high-accuracy there’s a narrower band of possible change associated with that EPD.
Q. Will we see more DNA applications for commercial cattle, and will they necessarily be linked to a breed?
A. The challenges to bring the technology to the commercial level, either cow-calf producer or a feedlot, have always been on the cost side. With the improvements we’ve seen, the ability to create some of these specialized panels, like GeneMax, for a couple of economically relevant traits, have allowed that cost to come down to where it’s much more applicable to the commercial industry.
In general, the breed linkage has been the one frustration the researchers have had, even with these high-density genotype platforms. We talk about the 50K test as being the gold standard today, but there’s a tremendous amount of research being done on higher density panels, like 800,000 SNPs. The common theme thus far? The technology has had to be developed and used within a breed to really have consistent results.
That’s going to be true on the commercial side, too. Commercial cattle tests developed on a certain breed are going to be a lot more effective when used on populations carrying a high percentage of that breed influence.
Q. What would make it worth the cost and labor for a commercial producer?
A. In the commercial herd, the ability to know more about that potential replacement heifer is a huge benefit. I may know more about her by running this test—before I ever made a decision to breed— rather than after she had two or three calves.
It has tremendous opportunity to make genetic improvement in a herd and eliminate some bottom outliers at an earlier age, creating a more consistent calf crop. When you look at the costs associated with developing a bred heifer, it can be very lucrative. You can make decisions to make sure you have the right bred heifers and if you’re selling bred heifers you can use it as a marketing tool.
You’re going to find the same thing when you go to sell to the feedlot.
Q. What about the future of DNA testing?
The real application for it down the road is when we get into having the ability to measure traits or identify differences in traits that we don’t really have a good way to measure today: health, efficiency or things like that. Reproduction and fertility is a huge component of the traits that need future attention.
Chuck Jolley is a free lance writer, based in Kansas City, who covers a wide range of ag industry topics for Vance Publishing.
Comments (0) Leave a comment