LIVE CHAT WRAP-UP: DNA AND GENOMICS

On Tuesday, we hosted a live chat on our Facebook page featuring our very own vice president, Dr. Larry Corah. We invited users to eat lunch at their computers or near their mobile devices and discuss genomics and DNA testing with us. Since not everyone could join in, though, we wanted to share a couple of questions that we hear an awful lot from producers who want to test the water with DNA.

QUESTION: How accurate is DNA technology today?

ANSWER: DNA technology in certain areas has made tremendous progress and in other areas we’re on the tip of where we’ll be in 5 to 10 years. For certain traits like marbling, DNA markers have been identified that can very accurately portray the carcass quality potential of animals.

It’s important to keep in mind that the heritability of various traits ranges
from highly heritable — like growth and carcass traits — to lowly heritable,
like reproductive traits. Depending on the number of markers that have been
identified and are utilized in a DNA test, from 20% to 30% of the genetic variation can be identified by the markers and for some traits even higher.

QUESTION: A lot of producers I talk to are curious but a little intimidated by the subject of DNA testing and genomics. Where would you suggest these cattlemen turn to learn the basics of how this technology can be used on their operations?

ANSWER: There is no question that DNA technology is a fairly complicated subject but as you start pursuing the volumes of information available, it becomes considerably easier to understand. There are some excellent references to consider as starting points. You might go to our website and check out our Q&A section related to our reduced-platform DNA technology, GeneMax. You’ll probably find that helpful.

[Note: The American Angus Association also has some helpful resources:

Already knew the answers to those questions, but have others? Post them below. We’d be happy to continue this discussion!

Be sure to join us for our next chat, scheduled for this fall!

CARCASS DATA THAT MATTERS, PART II

Yesterday, we talked about marbling and Quality Grades. Today, we conclude Paul’s advice on carcass data that matters.

Muscling, primarily represented as ribeye area in carcass data, is an important element for producers to focus on.

“This is a concrete measure of the size of one of the most valuable cuts of a beef carcass and, while not perfect, it’s a good indicator of overall carcass muscle content,” Paul says. “It’s most important when selling cattle on a carcass value-based system to maintain enough ribeye size in order to avoid Yield Grade discounts.”

Yield Grade is a measure of the relationship of subcutaneous fat to red meat yield. So, we’re shooting for more red meat yield and less subcutaneous fat and, consequently, larger ribeye areas.

The USDA grading service has a formula that indicates that a carcass of a certain weight should also have a ribeye area of a certain size. For instance, an 850-pound carcass should have a 14.0-inch ribeye. Any deviation from that 14.0-inch size will either indicate a higher than average amount of overall carcass muscling or a lower than average amount of muscling.

Consequently, the Yield Grade assigned to that carcass will reflect the positive or negative deviation from “average” and the producer will either receive a premium or a discount if the deviation is enough to warrant such an adjustment.

A cow-calf producer should strive to keep ribeye size somewhere between 12 to 16 inches, with the optimum being 12 to 14 inches for the end-users of our product.

Paul points out that restaurants and retailers generally favor ribeyes smaller than 14 inches, but he is not aware of a value-based payment system offered by any of the major packers that rewards the seller for these somewhat smaller ribeyes.

The Certified Angus Beef® brand requires ribeye size to be between 10 and 16 inches to qualify for the brand, so we’ve set a limit on both the lower and upper end of the scale to try to control variation in the size of important beef cuts.

Muscling also impacts dressing percentage, which measures final hanging carcass weight as a percentage of live weight. Higher muscle content, as well as subcutaneous fat content, positively impact dressing percentage. Higher dressing percentages mean more hanging weight which will be paid for on a grid pricing system. In the end, producers should strive to include muscling as criteria in selecting genetics, without going overboard, and while maintaining a balanced approach to evaluating all traits.

2010_6_17_mr_Triangle H-9 — Improving Yield Grade need not hurt your cowherd goals.

Paul explains that there is a diminishing point of returns at the ranch, where extremely heavily muscled cows will not re-breed and are inefficient. Therefore, balance is the key.

While backfat can have a significant impact on fed cattle value, Paul doesn’t think it’s an appropriate area to focus on when making herd decisions.

“I believe that the cow-calf producer’s job is to apply pressure to maintain muscling, which impacts Yield Grade directly, instead of selecting against backfat,” he says.

Indeed, less backfat has a positive impact on Yield Grades, but it also has a potential negative impact on cow efficiency and fertility.

“I think we have more important things to place focus on than backfat when using EPDs and Indexes, as long as the backfat EPD isn’t extremely high,” Paul says. “As well, if we get enough muscle in our cattle and manage their condition at the feedlot through nutrition and marketing cattle ‘on time’ when they reach 0.55 inches of backfat thickness, on average, we won’t have to worry about Yield Grade.”

Any questiongs about how to apply carcass data that we didn’t cover? Leave us a comment and we’ll get you the answer!

Carcass data that matters, Part I

Carcass data. It’s both an awesome tool and, at times, an overwhelming puzzle piece that you just don’t know where to fit into your breeding and culling decisions.

That’s why we sat down with Paul to get the scoop on what really matters and what data should influence the future of your herd.

We broke his advice into two parts — the first related to Quality Grade and the second related to Yield Grade — and will share the conclusion tomorrow.

The first measurement Paul mentions? Marbling, of course. Those scores, along with the Quality Grades that are derived from them, are very important.

“Without marbling there isn’t much chance to produce a premium product,” Paul says. And with a decreased potential for premiums comes decreased demand from feeders and packers.

“The U.S. average for percent Choice is about 62%, with northern packers seeing closer to 75% on a frequent basis and Texas packers closer to 53%, on average,” he explains. “Therefore, depending on regional location, a producer needs to strive to beat those numbers by a large margin in order to have premium cattle.”

For some producers in the northern part of the U.S., this is a lofty goal since the benchmark is already so high. But, for Angus producers, it may not be high enough. Since the breed is so highly capable, it’s completely reasonable to shoot for 90 percent Choice or higher.

If the calf crop averages lower than 75% Choice, it stands to reason that improvements can be made and this should be a priority. Likewise, the percentage CAB goal should be higher than 24%, and possibly 35% to 40% for a beginning goal.

2007_5_mr_Skavdahl-6 — These calves come from a long line of high-marblers.

Selection for bulls in the top 20% of the Angus breed for the Marbling EPD should help increase marbling in the cow herd and subsequent calf crops. Since marbling is a highly heritable trait, stacking two generations of high-marbling genetics begins to make a big difference in the measurable results.

“When a ranch’s cattle can consistently produce much better than average quality grades, then the opportunity exists for that producer to either market that proven advantage to feedlots or retain ownership and sell carcasses on a grid directly to the packer for premiums,” Paul says.

Fortunately, selection for higher marbling can readily be done without negative impacts to other economically important traits.

Join us tomorrow for Part 2 of Paul’s advice on carcass data that matters.

Schooled in Angus confusion

We love it when former interns keep in touch. It’s even better when we can tap into this growing network of informed young professionals to help us cover an event or story in their area. That recently happened when Anthony Pannone, now in grad school at Texas A&M University, sat in on a class session that we think you might find interesting. Read on to get his take on it. –Miranda

Knock knock . . . Who’s there?

Four businessmen and one professor . . . Four-businessmen-and-one-professor who?

President of Certified Angus Beef LLC (CAB), John Stika. Texas seedstock producer, James Henderson. CAB-licensed meat distributor, Joe Boutte. Concept executive-chef for Saltgrass Steakhouse and Claim Jumper, Ric Rosser. And Texas A&M University professor, John Siebert, who invited the businessmen to speak with his class.

On March 19^th in College Station, Texas (a.k.a. Aggieland), I attended a forum set up by agricultural economics professor Dr. Siebert . Pumped to be there, I wondered why he invited the four links in CAB’s supply chain.

“CAB empowers participants to sustainably make more net income,” he said. “This is the most difficult thing to do in all of agriculture. I admire the fact that CAB has created over $300 million in premiums received by beef producers. Without CAB, beef producers would have less income. “

Dr. Siebert is an energetic guy fueled by a passion for teaching and learning. His classroom delivery is similar to an inspirational Sunday sermon. In addition to watching him excite the students and encourage them to ask questions, it was cool to listen to the speakers—or as Dr. Siebert called them, “professors for the day.”

Going into the forum I knew the basics of supply chain. Though still not an expert, I came away from the forum with something I had known but to which I never devoted any critical thought. Stika mentioned one thing that currently does and will continue to affect CAB’s supply chain: Angus confusion. You know you suffer from Angus confusion (scientists are looking for a cure) when anything labeled an Angus product leads you to assume it’s a CAB product.

For those familiar with the brand, for those fortunate to have eaten a CAB steak, burger or other beef product, Angus confusion is less severe or of zero concern. We know what to look for, and we know what we’re getting. But for non-CAB consumers, for consumers yet to wake up and cross into CAB eating-experience paradise, there is the risk of catching Angus confusion. The risk increases as more and more less-than-premium-quality Angus programs hit the market.

Angus confusion: either it leads to an unfulfilling, mediocre eating experience or a rocking party where taste buds celebrate high-quality standards proven to drive business bottom lines into the black. On this day in Aggieland, more than 150 young people were provided with a cure that is hoped to minimize the delirium caused by just-did-make-the-grade quality being confused with consistently-premium quality.

Adios,

Anthony

Chef math

Participating in our quarterly sales meetings always gives me a great perspective on what beef marketers are dealing with, especially when trying to juggle higher prices while propping up demand for your product. As we talked over issues and challenges yesterday, I thought you might like a sneak peek into some of the math we’re up against.

Cattle producers throw lots of terms around–like average daily gain and weight per day of age–that are fairly well understood by those in the industry. These are calculations we do often and understand their importance to our business.

Folks in the foodservice industry also have some math they do on a regular basis. “Food Cost” is a very common one. Simply put, it refers to the cost of the food on the plate as a percent of the menu price.

For example, an entrée that costs the restaurateur $7 and is on the menu for $21 has a 33% food cost. It’s a well understood metric in the foodservice business and most chefs measure their performance and establish their menus based on food cost.

Of course the danger there is that those percentages don’t deposit in the bank very well. It would be like measuring your success as a cow-calf operator by looking at weaning weight as a percentage of cow weight. Probably an important number but dollars of weaning-weight sold is what you take to the bank.

Overcoming the “Food Cost” objection is one of the challenges for beef in growing market share over cheaper protein options on a restaurant’s menu. For example, chicken can produce a very attractive food cost. An 8-oz. boneless chicken breast could easily have a cost of $1.50/portion. When put on the menu at $12, the chef gets a food cost of 12.5%, a number any chef would be proud of. On the other hand, an 8-oz. portion of CAB® brand sirloin might have a cost of $5/portion. When put on the menu at $18, this entrée has a food cost of 28%, double that of the chicken. To the chef scrutinizing food cost, it looks like chicken wins.

But wait! That chicken order generated $10.50 of profit. The beef order brought in $13.

This math seems pretty simple, but getting many chefs and restaurant owners to turn away from relying mainly on food cost is a huge challenge. It’s one you can bet the sales staff here at CAB is always working on for you!

~Mark

Quality improvements aren’t enough, yet

You may think we preach ALL THE TIME about managing to increase marbling in your cattle. We tell you how it’s a profitable goal, we point to examples of ranchers doing it right, and we tell you how to get there.

4008A Ribeyes with empanadas Argentinian-style — How can we get people to enjoy more beef and keep coming back?

But just the other day, I came across a blog post that reminded me why. Alan Newport, editor of Beef Producer, shared a conversation with a colleague, who said:

“..beef is rarely on my purchase list anymore. I buy small filets in restaurants on special occasions but bringing beef home from the supermarket is becoming more rare (no pun intended).

As we’ve all discussed for years, consistency is a big part of this”

And he went on to compare it to experiences he could get with other, cheaper protein sources:

“I can buy a pork tenderloin from nearly anyone, or ‘boneless’ pork chops, or chicken breasts. In all three instances, I know what I’m getting. I know what it will taste like when it comes off the grill and I know how to cook it on the grill to get the results I want.”

My flippant answer would be, “Well, just buy Certified Angus Beef (R) and thanks to those 10 carcass specifications you’ll always know what you’re getting.”

But this is bigger than that and deserves a thoughtful response.

Brown_Scott — Scott Brown, University of Missouri ag economist

Last year, Missouri economist Scott Brown talked about how demand for higher quality beef weathered the economic crisis better than lower quality.

“Being able to supply a product that isn’t as sensitive to economic changes is one way to reduce risk to producers. When the Choice/Select spread narrowed substantially, we saw the Prime/Choice spread stay relatively wide,” he said.

If producers set their sights high—like upper 2/3 Choice and Prime—and started producing more higher quality beef, Brown’s model shows a 10% increase in overall demand for beef. He says that means we could add 6 million more cattle to our national herd.

Is the key for building demand really all about marbling?

Lots of intelligent people I talk to say yes. One of them is Daryl Tatum, Colorado State meat scientist, who has done a lot of consumer preference work.

“Marbling has kind of gotten a bum rap from a lot of people saying it really doesn’t predict much, but across the full range, it has predictive capabilities,” he said. “If you’re going out for that occasion where you’re wanting to treat yourself, it’s pretty important to have marbling in there. It really performs on all levels when you do.”

His work shows tenderness and “buttery,beef-fat” flavor account for 91% of the variation in overall sensory experience; in turn, 40% of tenderness variation and 71% of variation in that desirable flavor is due to marbling score. Marbling matters.

Alan answered his colleague: “I keep harping on this over the years. Some is from inconsistent genetics. Some is environment. Some is handling from kill forward but not much problem there anymore.

I maintain a big part is genetics, followed by environment. The beef industry keeps harping on hybridization to the degree there is no longer any attempt to maintain homozygosity in the base seedstock. This is EXACTLY the opposite of the pork and chicken industries and presents unpredictability in both performance and meat product.”

We agree that it’s part genetics, part management and environment, along with a conservative tendency to limit risk–and the decisions related to all the above still suffer from a great disconnect between the segments of our beef industry.

We’ve seen much collaboration in the industry the past two decades, and beef quality has certainly improved. There will always be at least some disappointing beef meals, but our best strategy is to make it SO good, SO often, that more people will turn toward beef than away.

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Good cattle news abounds

I’m not naïve enough to believe that the beef industry is always all about teamwork. But I am optimistic enough to believe that we’re working toward that, and gaining ground.

I’ve shared enough examples of how teamwork between rancher and feeder can create better beef, but this last week at the Cattle Industry Convention and Tradeshow I was reminded how cooperation between all stakeholders can really move the needle.

Heading into the convention, I asked you all to share your good news. I jotted down pages full of notes and came away feeling pretty proud of our industry.

In no particular order, here’s a list of some of the items I found both interesting and encouraging:

Microwaveable roast — This roast cooked in the microwave during a presentation. We got to taste test the product, and I can say it was pretty darn good!

-We learned about new beef products coming down the pike (like microwaveable hamburger!) that will help build beef demand.

-John Lundeen, director of market research for NCBA, told us about consumer attitudes toward beef. One of my favorite observations: When consumers are asked if they think beef is safe, they say, “Yes!” He says, “We are winning here.”

-“The beef industry reduced its environmental impact by 9% from 2005 to 2011.” Way to go producers!

-Free Trade agreements give us better market access to market our high-quality beef. (That comment from Cattle-Fax reminded me of a recent story I did on South American beef demand, just one good example of that.)

-The difference between an ungraded beef carcass and a Prime one is $60/cwt. “That’s real money!,” Cattle-Fax told the crowd.

And the notes go on and on, and hopefully I can recap more of the week here later on.

But we not only picked up on good news from speakers and presentations, but also from talk in the hallways and Twitter chatter. Several people tweeted us their thoughts via #GoodCattleNews, covering everything from the weather at home (rain—halleluiah) to future beef demand.

When we got home, we threw all those participants in a virtual hat (random.org, that is) and found our steak package winner:

We can’t argue with that logic, Jennifer! We know health=more profitable, higher quality cattle.

Thanks for playing along. You may not be grilling in Tampa-like temps, but hopefully you’ll feel the same optimism we did last week as you enjoy your Certified Angus Beef (R) brand steaks!

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Crossbred pressure?

Hey seekers,

There I was, dreaming again. I had been thinking about my straightbred commercial Angus cowherd a lot that day.

The calves weaned as heavy as last year despite the drought, and they stayed healthy in the lot. The cows bred back to where I had to sell more just for age to make room for better heifers coming in that would intensify the best of my cow families. It was good for cash flow and genetic improvement.

That night I was going over the reasons for my breeding program. We have two pastures for cows with the younger, better ones kept near home so I can breed them artificially (AI) to highly proven bulls that improve gain and grade along with cowherd traits.

I started AI back in the 1990s and got serious about it after feeding my first pen of calves and getting as many Standards as upper Choice. Last year, they were all Choice or higher with 20% Prime. But since way more than half of my calves were heifers, and we have extra silage for backgrounding, I’m not finishing steers this year.

Last drink before bedtime in backgrounding pen

Maybe it’s time to go back to blindness on individual quality and figure they are all acceptable on average; I can just aim for more pounds. Would that open the door to crossbreeding that many animal scientists point to?

Not for me, because the cow families are still the most important part of my herd, and there is no simple alternative that adds to predictability in my replacements. Using crossbred bulls on straight cows gives me a wider range of genetics in heifers, and some lines may match up differently with different crossbred bulls.

Yes, they might stay in the herd longer, but how does that help if I am less satisfied, if the consumer is less satisfied as we give up on beating 20% Prime? I would rather sell younger cows at a premium because I know my heifers are better.

I nodded off to sleep thinking I will go back to finishing steers next year and keep my herd on its straightbred course.

But then the phone rang. Yeah: in my dream…

I thought, who uses the phone these days? They could have texted me or emailed. But anyway, expecting a corporate cold-caller raising funds for the less fortunate, or a vinyl siding salesman, I picked up to hear some kind of robo-call. It was trying to sell ideas.

Politics, I thought. Always politics this time of year. But it was about my cowherd, not my country. Well, indirectly it was about my country, because if I kept going down this road of straightbreeding, I was not being patriotic. This country’s beef industry was built upon the concept that all breeds are created equal but different, and we must use those differences to our advantage.

Or be thought a pitiful fool, the robocaller said. Just Google the words “heterosis, cattle, and straight breeding.” you’ll see what the dream caller meant.

Don’t ask me how a robocaller could know my cowherd breeding program—this was a dream, remember? And if it was already crazy, it got crazier.

The composite voice then said it represented some kind of Orthodox Bovine Church I was supposed to be part of, but apparently had fallen away from over the years. Where was my FAITH?

There’s great power in the proven science of hybrid vigor, and just as much in the dogma of complementarity, “taking advantage of” variations among the equal-but-different breeds to leap ahead. Using one breed to chase herd improvement is the slippery slope to Hell, the caller proclaimed.

Oh, man. I sure didn’t want to slip on any of what it was saying. But then I was in a pasture where anything slippery was easy to dodge, and there was no phone, not even a mobile.

There was just this uniform, straightbred herd that conventional wisdom was challenging. Were they eating my free lunch every day? Could I really earn another 4% per year, if only I believed enough in the system to stop believing in my use of data and in my cow families?

It made me wonder, in my dream. Then I woke up.

Until next time, let’s keep targeting the brand and building tomorrow together.

Steve

What to consider when you’re on the fence

The two most important men in my life are both directly tied to farming and cattle production. And to be honest, it doesn’t matter which one I talk to on any given day, the conversation tends to go in the same direction.

“I sure wish we’d get some rain.”
“Another day over 100 degrees.”
“I had to turn another hay customer down today.”
“I need to get those cows in and start thinking about early weaning.”
“I’d sure like to keep more of my heifers back this year, but I don’t know where I’m going to get the pasture.”

The drought has hands-down been the topic of summer 2012.

If your crops and pastures have suffered from drought, chances are, you might have some difficult decisions to make this year on heifers after weaning. Maybe resources require you sell more of your heifers than usual, which means you need to be more focused than ever on selecting the most elite set to retain in the herd.

At home in Indiana where the corn crop looks like this across the entire county, you can bet my dad will be more selective than ever about the heifers he’ll keep and which ones to take an early payday on.

While you may be on the fence this year about how many heifers to retain or cows to cull, you don’t have to lose sleep at night wondering if you kept the right ones.

While the commercial Angus herd doesn’t come fully equipped with EPDs and pedigrees, there are still ways for those cattlemen to gain confidence in selection. Often times, the information that you already have can be a huge asset. Good records of how your calves perform can be a key indicator of the maternal quality in your herd – especially if you use similar sire groups. Consider partnering with a feedlot to get more information on feed efficiency and carcass quality. That last piece of the puzzle can come in handy when making cuts in the cowherd for next years’ team.

But what about this year’s heifers? Last week, Gary discussed GeneMax™ as another tool to cure your droughty blues in heifer retention. Without progeny data, it’s difficult to guess how young cattle will perform as part of the herd. Do you think you could tell without all of the tools?

A couple weeks ago, I introduced a contest on our Facebook page and asked folks to rank five heifers in terms of the potential each had for gain and grade. While we had several people take a stab at it, none of our entries ranked all five in the correct order. In all fairness, we were being a bit tricky. As some of our contestants pointed out, asking cattlemen to evaluate heifers on phenotype alone for gain and grade is hardly fair – especially when we’re using GeneMax™ scores as official placings.

That is exactly the point we were trying to drive home with the contest. In many cases, commercial Angus cattlemen don’t have data for young replacement heifers. In pastures where multiple bulls are turned out, or clean-up bulls are used to follow AI matings, you may not even be able to accurately identify complete pedigrees. Selection decisions are often made by the naked eye. A good set of feet and legs, a sound udder, and overall balance are undeniably important qualities in potential cows. However, in a year where maybe you can only afford to keep 10-15% of your heifers instead of 30-35%, consider using additional tools from the toolbox.

Just like our judging contest online, it’s difficult to tell which of these western Nebraska calves have the greatest potential for gain and grade.

Whether it’s diving a little deeper into your records or using a genomic test like GeneMax™ to add more information to your females, don’t let this year’s heifer and cow selection be a gate-cut decision. In times where grass is short, corn is sparse and break-even costs are scary, the value of adding predictability to your herd is greater than ever.

Author’s Note: Congratulations to Heather Hamilton for winning our Facebook contest last week! She most-closely ranked the five heifers according to gain and grade potential. Look for your prize in the mail, Heather!

~Kara

Solving the Mystery of DNA Collection – Part I

The Black Ink team has been talking about DNA technology quite a bit lately and how it relates to cattlemen. But let’s face it, anytime you implement a new tool in your herd, the mechanics can be a bit intimidating.

What kind of DNA sample is required to get the information I really want on my cattle?

On crime-solving television, DNA convicts criminals from just one strand of hair, a finger nail clipping, or some dried up blood off the back of a car bumper. Just like everything else in Hollywood, there’s a lot more that goes into DNA collection in the real world.

DNA samples need to be high-quality in order to get good lab results. If samples aren’t good enough, all you wind up with is a day of working cattle and a report that likely shows a high percentage of failed tests. Some of these “how to’s” could save you that heartache:

Basics for Better Blood Samples

• Hello, my name is ______. Yes, it’s basic, but so important. Always start by labeling your collection cards with an identifying number for each animal. Generally a tag or tattoo number, you’ll need a sure way to match your test results back to the individual animals.

• ABC: Adequate Blood Collection– When samples go to the lab, they take a hole punch out of the saturated area. Sometimes multiple punches are needed to get the best results. Make sure you have enough blood on the card, but not so much that pooling occurs.

• Manure is the enemy. Although fecal matter is used in other types of bovine tests, DNA sampling is not the place for it. Blood cards contaminated with manure are extremely difficult to get test results from. To decrease your fertilizer frustrations, consider taking blood samples from the ear instead of the tail. You may also want to make sure the ranch hand delegated to tailing isn’t also handling your DNA cards.

Samples like this one would fail a DNA test due to the manure.

• Keep it clean. Beyond manure, try to keep your collection cards away from dust or other contamination. I know what you’re thinking – how does one avoid dirt while working cattle? It’s not easy, but it’s worth the extra effort to ensure sample quality. If you’re bleeding from the ear, keep a rag on hand to wipe out ear wax or dirt before collection.

• This is not poker – don’t stack the deck. It’s very important to allow blood cards to dry thoroughly (24 hours, out of sunlight) before being stacked. Also, don’t mail samples in a sealed plastic bag. If blood coagulates on the card, sample quality may be compromised.

The GeneMax™ test kit is only $0.50 and includes your blood collection card and a sterile lancet.

*To order one of the above kits, visit http://www.cabpartners.com/genemax/order.php.

If blood collection isn’t the best fit for your operation, stay tuned tomorrow for part two for alternative DNA collection methods.

Check out this video or this flyer for more step by step directions on collecting a blood sample.

~Kara

LIVE CHAT WRAP-UP: DNA AND GENOMICS

You may also like

CARCASS DATA THAT MATTERS, PART II

You may also like

Carcass data that matters, Part I

You may also like

Schooled in Angus confusion

You may also like

Chef math

You may also like

Quality improvements aren’t enough, yet

You may also like

Good cattle news abounds

You may also like

Crossbred pressure?

You may also like

What to consider when you’re on the fence

You may also like

Solving the Mystery of DNA Collection – Part I

You may also like