$100K Clone Mutt - Page 7

Yes, but you get Black & White... the shape of the marks changed, but, the color... Black & White.

Time to blow this FANTASY ISLAND back to reality.

Bee, when you quote an article for facts, you can't cherry pick the quotes you want.  Joanro, your "facts" are completely wrong.

1)  The slim clones all have "subtle difference" in their bucking pattern.  This means that they are not the same! Hence the use of the word "difference".

2)  But wait! it gets better!  There were SIX clones.  One broke his own neck he was so hard to handle and the other the breeder put him down because he was too mean.

3)  So our successful clone percentage is 4/6 or 67% that the clones are repeatable to the donor for Slim only.  Nowhere near the 100% espoused by Joanro and others. The data pool that Joanro and others are using to "prove" their point has been culled to these four animals and therefor the data is skewed (not accurate)

4) The only example that they are constantly quoting is slim, what about the other bulls?

5) Houdine, who is widely recognized as a sire of good bucking bulls, first clone was a pet.  Marty Foutch, President of NBBA saw him and stated this about Houdini's clone.

6)  Other Bucking Bulls have been cloned, Doctor Proctor, Yellow Jacket, Little Yellow Jacket, Blueberry Wine, Moody Blues, White Magic and Big Bucks.  That's a total of 8 bulls we know of (including Slim)

7)  Only ONE of these other bulls, Big Bucks, has ONE of his clones that someday may be good enough for a BFTS event (national series event)

8)  So our new more accurate percentage is 2/8 bulls cloned have clones that can buck and that's if we are generous and consider Big Bucks whose clone hasn't made it yet.  That's a 25% success rate of Bulls whose clones can buck at a national level, same as the donors did. 

We really want to beat this dead horse that "bucking is ALL genetics"?  All this info is in the same article (except for the Houdini clone) that Bee quoted.  Read the whole article.  Pay attentintion to all the facts, not just those that help someone's agenda. 

One more final nail in the coffin.  A quote from the guy who cloned Slim.

"For instance, I think if you wanted to clone Rooster, you would have the same situation as you had with the Slim clones, where if I wanted to clone Dillinger or a bull that just learned how to buck and turned into a great bucker, then I don't think your chances will be as good."

This guy is a professional, he does this for a living and he talks about bulls learing to buck and turning into great buckers. So much for all genetics.  The facts don't bear this out and the people in the know don't support this hypothesis. 

 

GSD Lineage,

Too funny!  They are Holstiens.  The entire breed is Black and White.  Unless you have red and white holsteins of which there are a few.  But you NEVER get a red and black and white holstein.  The color has nothing to do with cloning, it is a breed characteristic. You can't lay the black and white attribute to cloning.  And again, the clones have different color patterns because of the activation of different color genes when the calves are in utero (in the womb).  Enviroment can and will affect which genes are activated (expressed or displayed).  Susie mentioned it earlier.  It is called epigenetics.

Instead of trying to argue anecdotal "evidence" that is based on uninformed information, take the time and read the research.  It is fascinating stuff that they are finding out.  Truly eye opening.

Bzcz,

I actually agree with your points. If you read my opinion carefully, I am not saying every clone would be exactly like the donor bull. I left open grey area for that when I mentioned "no genes mapped for a 'will' to buck." I did however want to show where Joan was coming from with her assertions. She tends to reword things in her favor but I chose not to dwell on that. Instead I rely on smarter people than myself to make the finer points. 

Thanks.

Sorry Bee,

I didn't catch that when I read your post the first time.  My bad. 

Bee, you said I "reword things in my favor"? I Didn't reword ANYTHING. I was speaking from my own observations. But you have your agenda, you always bring your presonal attacks into any discussion, so you and bzcz can go have your little narrow world buzz fest together and feed off each other's brain malfunctions. I thought you were being objective on a thread you know nothing about for a change, but you were just being your usual self....taking the oportunity to make your self rewarding personal attacks. You and bzcz are a pair, figures you'd be drawn in like a magnet to a like personality.....maybe you and bzcz are clones.

Bzcz, all YOUR phony, made up points have been blown out of the water, now you make comments like "exactly the same" just as you said "all life experiences" ...nobody said the bulls buck EXACTLY the same....you are grasping at straws in an attmpt to be right. Bz, it doesn't matter how many clones you find that didn't work, the stock contractors are the ones paying the bills, and they are the ones providing PBR wit hcloned bulls that buck...like the donors. Go find an argument you know something about , and you and bee can maybe educate each other. You failed hugely here. Btw, as for my "facts" being all wrong, how would you know? Your comments and "changing words to suit you" have made it clear you don't know anything about the subject of PBR or cloning or dna or bulls or cows or how tohave a discussion without interjecting personal attacks....you and bee should team up.

Joan, 

Take it easy, please. There are no personal attacks if you slow down and try to understand the differences being said. You are over reacting as I am not denying your expertise. I believe all is not known about cloning genetics for certain skills possessed by the donor. If you read carefully, that is about it. When you make a one sentence statement about the heritability of an an action based on known heritable characteristics, there is room for debate.

Certainly your professional observations have merit, I never intended to disparage that. 

ROFLMAO!!!! :))  It's a stock contractor who cloned Slim who's talking about bulls learning to buck and not genetics. "... where if I wanted to clone Dillinger or a bull that just learned how to buck and turned into a great bucker, then I don't think your chances will be as good."  You go argue with him now.  Go ahead and feel free to debate any of the points I brought up with outside verifiable information.  Since "you know what you know" I'm betting you can't/won't. 

Good job Joanro, don't let the facts get in the way of what you know. 

You use vague terms and generalities.  I gave you a list of 8 bulls who have been cloned that have not produced a clone on the BFTS level, per the PBR, not what I think I know.  Go ahead and list all the clones that are there and  from what bulls.

I won't hold my breath for that list. 

Ok, bee.