New Zealand’s beef industry is building a genetic evaluation designed for its own farm systems, markets and environments. Beef + Lamb New Zealand asked AbacusBio to find out which traits farmers value most, and what they want from the genetic tools that will support it.
The challenge
New Zealand beef breeders rely on BREEDPLAN, a genetic evaluation system first developed for the Australian beef industry. Informing New Zealand Beef (INZB), a 7-year partnership between BLNZ and the Ministry for Primary Industries, aims to build genetic improvement capability that better fits New Zealand’s needs.
That work includes progeny test herds, new selection indexes and a New Zealand beef genetic evaluation. To get these right, BLNZ needed to know what the industry actually wants. Which traits matter most to farmers? Are there new traits worth developing? How do farmers use estimated breeding values (EBVs) and indexes today, and what would make those tools more useful?
This survey ran alongside a separate AbacusBio review of new traits used in major beef evaluations around the world. Together, the two projects were designed to inform BLNZ’s future phenotyping strategy and the design of New Zealand beef selection indexes.
Our approach
BLNZ sent the online survey to beef industry stakeholders. It was aimed mainly at farmers (bull breeders, commercial breeders and finishers), but rural professionals and others were also invited to respond.
1. Demographics, views and direct ranking
The first part asked about each respondent’s farm and production system, their breeding and bull-buying decisions, and their views on EBVs and selection indexes. Respondents also rated the importance of more than 20 current and possible new traits on a scale from 0 to 100.
2. Trade-off questions with 1000Minds
The second part used conjoint analysis, run through 1000Minds software. Respondents chose between pairs of trait improvements, such as “5 fewer heifers per 100 require assistance at calving” against “carcases are 12 kg heavier”. We set the 11 trade-offs with BLNZ so that each was worth roughly the same in economic terms. This meant any strong preference showed where farmers valued a trait more, or less, than the economics alone would suggest.
3. Finding groups with similar preferences
We compared preferences across business type, breed, region and farm class. We then used cluster analysis and principal components analysis to find groups of respondents with similar preferences, whatever their demographic profile.
The response was strong. Commercial breeders made up 44.5% of respondents and finishers 24.9%, and respondents came from all over the country.
What we found
Maternal traits come first. In the direct ranking, respondents put most emphasis on cow fertility, cow functionality (feet and legs, teats and udders, docility) and calving ease. Growth, carcass weight and feed efficiency came next. Feed efficiency was the only new trait among the top priorities.
Welfare and environmental traits ranked lowest. Parasite resistance was the highest of these, but still only 16th of 24 traits. Few respondents were willing to give up progress in production traits to gain progress in methane, nitrogen leaching or health traits. The report notes this may reflect the lack of a current economic signal, and that signals are likely to strengthen.
Farmers fall into two broad groups. The cluster analysis found a “maternal” group of 168 respondents, focused on calving ease, cow fertility and docility, and a “production” group of 136, focused on feed efficiency, weaning weight and carcass weight. Demographics explained little of the split. Bull breeders and commercial breeders were spread almost evenly across both groups. Finishers leaned towards the production group, although about a quarter sat in the maternal group.
Both groups want balanced indexes. Even the maternal group mostly agreed that maternal indexes should include carcass traits, marbling among them. Most respondents supported a simpler set of three indexes (maternal, terminal and dairy-beef). They also wanted sub-indexes and the ability to customise rankings. Almost 75% agreed at some level that New Zealand farm systems and supply chains need specialised indexes.
Support for genetic tools is solid but not universal. About 64% agreed or totally agreed that EBVs are a better, faster way to improve a herd, and 54% said the same of economic indexes. But when buying bulls, respondents rated overall appearance, structural soundness and horn or poll status above EBVs and indexes.
Existing EBVs are under-used. EBVs already exist for cow fertility (days to calving), calving ease and docility in the main breeds. However, recording is patchy and the units are often poorly understood on commercial farms.
Recommendations
We made six recommendations to BLNZ:
- Share the results with breed societies and industry. Breed societies deliver key genetic tools and can use the findings to set priorities for data collection and services.
- Keep investing in extension. Use BLNZ progeny test data to show what genetics means commercially, especially for fertility, and build on the strong interest in structural soundness.
- Develop structural traits. Work with breed societies on foot and leg and teat and udder scores, either within BREEDPLAN or as standalone evaluations.
- Scope feed conversion efficiency. Assess the cost-benefit of adding feed intake testing to progeny test programmes, likely alongside methane measurement.
- Scope new cow fertility traits. Test options that can be recalculated from existing days-to-calving data, such as splitting results by cow and heifer age, and express them in terms farmers already use.
- Improve selection indexes. Include functional and structural traits, simplify to three core indexes, add sub-indexes, and consider tools that let users rank animals on their own sub-index weightings.
Because breed societies own most current indexes, BLNZ will need to work with them on how these changes are implemented.
What happens next
The report gives BLNZ a clear, evidence-based picture of what New Zealand beef farmers value. Together with the parallel review of new traits, it is intended to shape BLNZ’s phenotyping and reference population strategy under INZB, and the design of future New Zealand beef selection indexes.
It also shows where the industry can make faster gains with tools it already has: better recording and better explanation of existing EBVs for fertility, calving ease and docility.
Read the full report: New Zealand Beef Industry Consultation Survey: Industry trait preferences and views on genetic tools, published by Beef + Lamb NZ Genetics.
How we can help
AbacusBio helps breed societies, industry bodies and breeding companies understand what their customers value and turn that into breeding objectives, new traits and selection indexes. If you’re planning a genetic improvement programme, talk to our team.
