Post by jamshundred on Feb 25, 2023 17:51:04 GMT
They have no one to blame but ADCA. They began with a ruse and goodness knows how many errors are still grazing. ADCA refused to use one of the top labs in the world, because Legacy began DNA testing at UCD. Petty, ignorant, and nasty group that keeps falling on it’s own stupidity sword.
ADCA minute excerpt from February
Pedigree and Genetics Committee – Kim Newswanger
• Kimberly Jepsen received an email from a member with concerns about PHA testing. This member
had a calf test positive for PHA at UC Davis, she sent two more samples of tail hairs and they also tested positive for PHA. The sire and dam are listed as non-carriers on the ADCA pedigree page. She sent samples in to test both the sire and the dam. The dam tested positive for PHA. She had the dam tested two more times and both came back positive. Kimberly sent the information to the P&G committee for further investigation. The cow has two offspring, both bulls, and only one has offspring recorded. Kimberly asked the owner of the cow to contact the owner of one of the bulls and inform him about the cow testing positive for PHA and encourage him to have the bull tested. There are concerns because the owner of the bull also owns PHA carrier cows.
• Kim Newswanger said the cow was originally tested as a non-carrier at TAMU, the original owner could have received an incorrect result. There were concerns about incorrect results coming from TAMU. Kimberly Jepsen stated that she has asked the owner of the cow to send new tail hairs to TAMU to perform another test which may help determine which lab is correct. Jim Woehl questioned whether the cow may have actually been tested originally and said that previous to Jill being the registrar, members could click on the obligate box without providing documentation.
ADCA minute excerpt from February
Pedigree and Genetics Committee – Kim Newswanger
• Kimberly Jepsen received an email from a member with concerns about PHA testing. This member
had a calf test positive for PHA at UC Davis, she sent two more samples of tail hairs and they also tested positive for PHA. The sire and dam are listed as non-carriers on the ADCA pedigree page. She sent samples in to test both the sire and the dam. The dam tested positive for PHA. She had the dam tested two more times and both came back positive. Kimberly sent the information to the P&G committee for further investigation. The cow has two offspring, both bulls, and only one has offspring recorded. Kimberly asked the owner of the cow to contact the owner of one of the bulls and inform him about the cow testing positive for PHA and encourage him to have the bull tested. There are concerns because the owner of the bull also owns PHA carrier cows.
• Kim Newswanger said the cow was originally tested as a non-carrier at TAMU, the original owner could have received an incorrect result. There were concerns about incorrect results coming from TAMU. Kimberly Jepsen stated that she has asked the owner of the cow to send new tail hairs to TAMU to perform another test which may help determine which lab is correct. Jim Woehl questioned whether the cow may have actually been tested originally and said that previous to Jill being the registrar, members could click on the obligate box without providing documentation.