Field demonstration analyzing the implementation of individual animal electronic identification and genetic testing in western range sheep flocks

Julie A Finzel; Austin R Brown; Roselle C Busch; Morgan P Doran; John M Harper; Daniel K Macon; Rebecca K Ozeran; Morgan R Stegemiller; Karissa Isaacs; Alison Van Eenennaam

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290281

Field demonstration analyzing the implementation of individual animal electronic identification and genetic testing in western range sheep flocks

PLoS One. 2023 Aug 23;18(8):e0290281. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290281. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ University of California Cooperative Extension, Kern County, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Bakersfield, California, United States of America.
² Department of Animal Sciences, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.
³ University of California Cooperative Extension, Solano County, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Woodland, California, United States of America.
⁴ University of California Cooperative Extension, Mendocino County, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Ukiah, California, United States of America.
⁵ University of California Cooperative Extension, Placer County, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Auburn, California, United States of America.
⁶ University of California Cooperative Extension, Fresno County, University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, Fresno, California, United States of America.
⁷ Department of Animal, Veterinary, and Food Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, United States of America.
⁸ Superior Farms, Denver, Colorado, United States of America.

Abstract

Adoption of electronic identification ear tags (EID) and DNA testing by commercial range sheep producers in the Western United States has been low, despite the availability of these technologies for over a decade. Jointly, these technologies offer an approach to provide individual animal performance data to improve flock health, genetic and reproductive management. This project involved a collaboration with five California sheep producers representing a broad geographic range, varying levels of pre-project EID adoption, and diverse operational practices. Tissue samples were collected from, and ear EIDs were placed in, a total of 2,936 rams and their potential lambs. We partnered with a commercial packing company, Superior Farms, to genotype the animals. Superior Farms used a targeted genotyping panel to assign parentage, and link individual animal identification (ID) to camera-graded carcass measurements. This enabled the collection of individual progeny carcass data and provided insight into sire performance, providing for the within-flock identification of prolific sires that were producing lambs with significantly more saleable meat as compared to their flock mates. Overall, almost 91% of lambs were successfully matched to their sire, and prolificacy ranging from 0-135 lambs per ram. There was as much as an $80 difference in the average edible product from camera-graded carcasses derived from lamb groups sired by different rams. A partial budget analysis modeling investment in an EID system coupled with an autodrafter and scale to collect individual weights and improve labor efficiency during processing, and a sheep flip chute to improve worker safety during foot trimmings, yielded a greater than 7:1 return on investment over a five-year time frame. Ideally, the data collection enabled by EIDs and DNA testing would feed into data-driven genetic evaluation programs to enable selection for more productive and profitable animals, and allow the US sheep industry to accelerate the rate of genetic improvement.

Copyright: © 2023 Finzel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Publication types

Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

MeSH terms

Animals
Bandages
Electronics
Genetic Testing*
Industry
Male
Sheep / genetics
Sheep, Domestic*

Grants and funding

This material is based upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number 2018-38640-28418 through the Western Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education program under project number OW19-339 “Collaboration to demonstrate the potential use and value of electronic identification and DNA testing in the sheep industry” (to JAF). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. USDA is an equal opportunity employer and service provider. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture”.