PHA

[marion]

There is an update on the ADCA website, regarding PHA.
www.dextercattle.org click on 'ADCA News', then 'Important PHA Update 9/16/09

..marion

[Rebecca]

Well that increases the amount of animals that could be affected doesn't it! I think the genral hope was that the mutation had occurred in Priapus so that you could rule out any animal that didn't have him in their pedigree. Unfortunately now that we have to conclude that Wheatear was definietly a carrier so we need to look at not just her progeny and her decendents but also her parents and their other offspring - how far back this goes becomes the issue.

Being in Australia, where testing is easy to arrange, I am currently deciding whether to bite the bullet and just test all our original herd members and then just KNOW what our herd status is. I will then only need to test calves born to carrier animals. It has the added advantage of being able to guarantee to potential customers which animals are free from the disease.



Edited By Rebecca on 1253153489

[Liz D]

Yes Rebecca, you're right about numbers potentially affected. Here in Canada it is quite amazing how many pedigrees begin with Wheatear. PHA is now obviously a world wide problem but with the testing that is available, I am sure that we can erradicate it from our breed in the next generation or two.



Edited By Liz D on 1253569536

[PorcPrunus NL]

There is an update on the ADCA website, regarding PHA.
www.dextercattle.org click on 'ADCA News', then 'Important PHA Update 9/16/09

..marion

So we know it has started with W. Wheatear or earlier.

sire is Woodmagic Squirrel 2nd (Dormouse x Mudstopper)
dam is Doesmead (s. Doesmead Cambo)

I think both Woodmagic as Doesmead have often inbred, so a genetic defect should have come out earlier.

I hope Wheatear was the first mutation, then it's much easier to find possible carriers.

When Wheatear has got his PHA from one of its grandsires (or granddam Mudstopper) then PHA will already be spread all over Europe.

Is there already more information?



Edited By PorcPrunus NL on 1288809241

[Minnie]

The thing that makes me sad is the number of people I know of in my neck of the woods that are burying their heads in the sand over PHA.

I recently tested a heifer from a positive cow and yahhh she's negative, which was really great, but that's the only way to go... test, test, test or cull via the abattoir (which I didn't really want to do with the three I've got but will all future positive heifers), we wont sell any of our PHA girls (3) and the bull from the herd they came from has 48 registered progeny on the Australian herd book.

I remember a thread that Beryl spoke quite a bit about Wheatear and the Doesmead connection.

Vicki

[Tim Watson]

Simple question......

Why can't I find Woodmagic Wheatear on the Breed register listing? If it is not on there how do we check progeny?

Thanks

[Broomcroft]

Tick both the Dead and Alive boxes at a guess???

[Tim Watson]

Thanks Clive.
Had a nagging doubt I was being thick when I posted it!!

[Broomcroft]

I always used to tick all the boxes, as there are cattle still alive that were born in the 1940's ???



Edited By Broomcroft on 1288865120

[wagra dexters]

The cow I refer to doesn't always have the same name. She can be Doesmead Diane 2nd, Doesmead Diana, Doesmead Diane. She isn't Doeshead Diane as in the UK on-line herdbook. Not going back over it now but I'm sure I found that that cow was actually the first Doemead Diane but with a spelling mistake.
Beryl told me that her Doesmead Diana 2nd had been used by Phillipa in the Templeton herd, that she was a beautiful cow with plenty of milk, but her temperament, especially after calving, was not good so she sold the cow in UK and sold the weanling heifer calf Wheatley to Canada.
Wheatley had 10 offspring, 7 of those were embryos that came to Australia. Five of those have been tested negative for PHA, the other two can't be tested, I think the reason being that no owners are available to give permission. Either that or there is no genetic material available to test.
Another Wheatley offspring was collected and semen imported to Australia. He is the source of PHA here. Graham & I have a tested-free daughter, and on the grounds of her type & quality we will use his straws again sometime but keep only tested non-carriers.
It's no big deal, having mutant lethal genes in Dexters. In every breed and species they are a normal process of evolution, along with advantageous mutations. What we do have to our advantage is a test to identify carriers and non-carriers.
Margaret

[PorcPrunus NL]

Margareth,

We know Woodmagic Wheatear was carrier for PHA.
Her mother Doesmead Diana 2nd seems to be the source. Because out of her this Wheatley was born (the source of PHA in australia).

That means likely that PHA doesn't come from the woodmagic herd, but from the doesmead herd.

Do you have the pedigree of Doesmead Diana 2nd??

[wagra dexters]

We only assume Woodmagic Wheatear was a carrier. We can't know for sure because she hasn't been tested. If Wheatear was a carrier her dam could have been also, possibly. We presume the sire wasn't a carrier because there'd be more evidence if he was. We assume Wheatear's offspring were sired by the bulls documented on their pedigrees but there is no scientific parent verification to prove that they were. Without DNA PV all we really know for sure is the PHA status of the cattle who have been tested.

I do have that pedigree but too big to scan. Go into DCS on-line herd-book. Click animal search, type in Doesmead, select 'F' then 'Dead'. Scroll down to number F08453 for Doesmead Diana 2nd. It will give you an idea anyway although there is a gaping hole in it.

The sire & dam of Homestead Bonny Boy M1414 are Grinstead Pretty Boy 2nd M1243 & Homestead Bee 4th F5171 who is by Homestead Pirandello M1177 from Homestead Bee F4842, who is by Lyons Falcon M1092 from Barrow Bee 8th F4168.
The sire & dam of Homestead Bridget 3rd F5316 are Grinstead Pretty Boy 2nd M1243 & Homestead Bridget 2nd App3 who is by Homestead Pirandello M1177 from Homestead Bridget App2/30 who is by Patrick of Homestead M968 from Homestead Colleen App1.

Margaret

[Minnie]

Hi Margaret,

Agree with:

It's no big deal, having mutant lethal genes in Dexters. In every breed and species they are a normal process of evolution, along with advantageous mutations. What we do have to our advantage is a test to identify carriers and non-carriers.

My bugbear is the people I know that are saying forget testing and just use a non carrier bull as in Chrondo, but at least the chrondo usually shows where PHA doesn't.

So I'm with you there are some beautiful animals from the line, so testing is the way and keep the negatives and freezer the positives.

Vicki

[Broomcroft]

I have to say that I am in two minds about PHA. Obviously you want to eradicate all problems but you have to prioritise them. We have so many diseases to deal with, or at least we do in the UK, that PHA, to be totally frank, wouldn't even appear on my radar. BVD, Lepto, Johnes, all sorts would be way ahead for me, not to mention TB. I've never heard of a case of PHA although I have heard some heresay. If it were rampant, surely we would hear more about it. Personally, I would put chondro ahead of PHA as it does cause problems even with only one gene being passed on, but with PHA, unless you actually get a PHA calf, all other calves are totally normal I believe.

Maybe I misunderstand it? I don't know about America and OZ, but in the UK we are smothered by tests and vaccines, so much so it is almost impossible to do them all. We have just had to cancel a testing program for a major but fairly rare disease in sheep because the cost is through the roof, and is not in proportion to the small risk we take by not testing.

I know that you may now tell me about free by inheritance, but I have 1 bull and 60 cows, so testing just the bull would be the only way I'd go unless the cost was very low, which, again in the UK, always expensive, I doubt.

[Denise]

HI all

W Wheatear can NOT be confirmed as a carrier as - there is no genetic material available to test! So at wost she can only be suspect.

all the bulls on our Australian AI list were tested - so any UK breeders using those lines have a "leg up" there.

if people tested bulls, - as with Chondro - you would be half way there.

co-operation with breeders testing their OLDEST females aomngst themselves would be the way to go. But, as we have found in Oz, co-operation isnt easy to achieve! too many egos to be bruised.

As happened both here and in the USA, there were some unborn abortions that were probably PHA that were originally diagnosed as Chondro - which caused much confusion, as they looked rather similar at first glance.

many cows that have PHA babies, espeically in large herd conditions, are not noticed till they are dead calving, or you have to get the vet because the foetus is too large for the cow to birth naturally.

I agree with Clive - you guys in the UK have such a hard row to how - Ive never seen such over-regulation and lack of commonsense by your authorities (or the govt for that matter, just like ours - govt by reaction to noisy minorities).

Wouldnt be a farmer in the UK for quids!

Chondro will be a bigger issue for the EU countries in the future years, as I see Sweden does not permit the importation of Chondro tested positive animals, and as has happened in other animals, many EU countries will jump on that bandwaggon!