Polled Mutation

If I had a polled calf born on my farm, and I insist the calf is a mutation because there are no other animals on any farm around me, or within at least a mile as the crow flies. . . and I've never seen one on my property. . . . . .would you agree that it should be registered as a fresh polled mutation? If not, why not?

Today, in 2015 in America, with tons of access to easy internet information and easy DNA testing.  I'd want to see a DNA parentage test and a polled test to prove it was a fresh mutation.   It would be easy for anyone to get on the internet, do 2 minutes of research, pluck some hairs and send them in, here in the year 2015.

But 31 years ago, in a small hobby breed with little understanding of DNA and NO access to the internet and NO easy access to DNA testing,  I would have just registered it without giving much thought or even thinking about DNA... Lots of horned cattle breeds were reporting occasional polled calves, so hornlessness should be expected to pop up in dexters from time to time.   Since so many people have been dehorning dexters for a very long time, to have one born naturally without horns would seem like a simple convenience to humans, and a big relief to calves to NOT have to be tortured with horn removal.   


Where does diversity come from in supposedly related animals?

Two full siblings with the EXACT same pedigrees only share 50% of the same genetics on average... Some siblings might only share 15% of the same genes (even though the average is 50%). You can get a TON of diversity out of fairly closely related animals.    When it comes to cousins or second cousins, you can even have some that might share nearly 0% of the same genes (other than mitochondrial DNA or Y-chromosome DNA).

Mitochondrial DNA is useful if you're looking at the mother's mother's mother's mother's line because an animal's mitochondrial dna is just a cloned copy of the mother.

Y-Chromosome DNA is useful if you're looking at the father's father's farther's line because an animal's y-chromosome DNA is mostly a clone of his fathers.

But regular DNA is so very inconsistent, that you can't make many conclusions about cousins.    Some might not even share ANY of the same DNA at all unless they share the same mother's mother's mother's line, or father's father's father's line.


Do fresh mutations make fresh DNA markers?

Completely random mutations usually make fresh DNA markers and leave a unique fingerprint. 

But non-random mutations at mutational hotspots can be 100% identical with identical markers.   This has even confused some relatively smart geneticists that haven't studied mutational hot spots.   There are many many cases where identical mutations with identical markers have occurred and the geneticist rack their brains trying to find a common ancestor because of long-standing old outdated myths that mutations can't be identical.

In certain places in chromosomes/genes, there is tricky genetic coding that can fool the dna copy translation system into making the exact same mistake over and over and over in completely unrelated animals.  It's sorta like how we humans have certain commonly misspelled words that we we often all misspell the exact same way.    

It's very likely that a Celtic Horn Regulator gene has a certain weak spot and that weak spot occasionally fails in exactly the same way.  There have been many many many reports of polled mutations in many different breeds of cattle, some are parentage tested.  If these mutations all share the same markers, then it's likely we have a mutational hotspot in a Celtic Horn Regulator gene, and all the fresh mutations, are identical.   If these mutations are occurring in the sperm cells of horned bulls, it will someday be easy to take a batch of horned bull semen, and find bunches of those sperm cells that have those identical mutations at that hotspot.  

You Quoted Someone. You should know that when you quote someone you provide the source of the quotes or you have wasted two dots of pixels, and the quote becomes useless.

Like this: "Pace and Perseverance can accomplish all things." Howard Casagrande, 1982

I've always known how to attribute quotes and I also know to include the source, when possible, which you failed to do.  I don't know why, there is this cut and paste option on a computer that doesn't even require you to type anything.  Here is some proof that I know how:

www.dextercattleforsale.co.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1204

by Woodmagic » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:37 am



"For years I have been looking for a spontaneous mutation for polling, where I could rest assured that I was not reducing my Dexter genes. Maybe I am too suspicious, but I still entertain doubts, knowing the propensity of bulls to overcome obstacles under the urges of nature. Where one knows that polled animals of another breed were also retained, I am left with the question mark. I believe the chances of such a mutation are around one in twenty thousand."

This would be your idol Kirk, the late Beryl Rutherford.  Was she wrong about her breeding practices, or wrong about this?

Another quote:


 Woodmagic » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:52 pm



"I do know the history of Esmeralda, and would love to believe it, especially as she carries Woodmagic breeding. I knew her breeder, it is a pity that the late owner refused to have her DNA tested. It maybe that the Cardiff project will come up with something, I live in hopes."


Gee, DNA testing was available yet refused Sourced from your Dexter idol Beryl Rutherford.  Even with a statement such as "I live in hopes" (though the context may have been referring to the Cardiff Report that might provide the answer) she still had her doubts.


Here is another quote from contributing member here on this site from the same source:


by JamsHundred » Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:16 am



"Percentages, in a breed as small in numbers as the Dexter breed in the 80's were by most scientific standards five times higher than 1 in 20,000 with some stating 1 in 1,000,000. That 20,000 figure is often quoted, unrealistically, by polled breeders.



DNA parentage testing has been used for nigh on four decades now, and certainly was an often used tool in some breeds, even a required one, by the 90's. A mutation of this importance in a rare, horned breed, deserved no less than to be tested and proved. To date, I know of not a single genetically proven mutation in the Dexter breed. I know the owner of Esmerelda was approached and asked permission to have that animal tested, because I've been told so by the Dexter breeder who made the request and have no reason to doubt the assertion.



In the US, a herd of horned Herefords has been closed for 122 years with never a mutation. A Dexter herd closed for 40 years has no mutations, and Ms. Rutherford whose herd has been closed for half a century has seen no mutations. And every supposed "mutation" has taken place on farms where polled animals were kept as well as the Dexters. This development is far too great a threat to this breed to have been permitted without substantiation of genetic mutation.



The worrisome thing besides more influx of genetics that dilute the DNA of this breed in ways we cannot yet know,

( what valuable characteristics are being displaced by others for instance), is that the breed is being threatened by change from a horned breed to a polled breed, and with polled being dominant, the transition could be rapid. It has taken only 20 years for one AI bull to garner a place on nearly one-third of US pedigrees, and the polled percentages are increasing at an alarming rate as well.



I fear this wonderful breed cannot withstand the onslaught of convenience, and frankly, though a little bit time consuming, and somewhat uncomfortable for the calf, dehorning is simply not such a burden that we should forego it, and risk losing traditional characteristics of the breed instead.



Thank you Moomin for posting information about the progeny of Esmerelda. An entirely different presentation has been posted over and over on some discussion groups and used to bolster arguments regarding the genetic status of this bull."


Though I cannot find the location of the statement (I believe it is on Facebook) Shaun Lord had commented on meeting Beryl Rutherford on a trip to England, and when the discussion turned to polled, Beryl Rutherford was highly skeptical of the "mutation" theory, and basically cast doubts on the entire process of introducing it to the Dexter breed.  I think Shaun looks here from time to time, perhaps she'll make an exception and post here to confirm or deny this if we say please?

That was fast Shaun    Thanks for confirming this.  In regards to Kirk, if we could only find a way to naturally poll the blinders he has on, just like he does with the horns of his Dexter herd.

I'm a realist, and I know polled is never going away.  I just wish breeders would be more educated and responsible about using polled in their matings, fully disclosing the presence of a polled ancestor (especially to those new to the breed) in their horned Dexters, they would NOT sell a horned bull out of one or two polled parents (or even ancestors without fully disclosing the presence of a polled ancestor to the buyer), and try their best to reduce the number of polled ancestors in their pedigrees.  Bragging about Saltaire Platinum 17 times in a pedigree like Kirk does with one of his heifers is not a badge of honor, in my opinion.

I almost skipped the visit........you know how that goes, thirty miles away, other places to visit on my mind like the lace museum. I made the call, Beryl said to please come but not too early as she was slow getting around. I bought her a gift of fine chocolates in Barnstable.......she loved chocolates. My husband wandered her farm with her hired hand James while the two of us yapped. Cindy Williams told me to be sure and bring photos of my herd. I was so pleased when she studied the photo of Ace of Clove Brook and told me he was a very nice bull. Beryl was extremely crippled at that point, only moved from her computer to a stool and no more for the four hour visit. As I said......I treasure the visit glad I got past the "next time" syndrome.

Kirk,

You are wrong.  I have had my nose in Dexter research long enough to know that you are being fed information.  Your are being a patsie.  All patsie's lose their usefulness in time and are discarded.   There is a history of this.  I could give you two major examples whose names everyone would recognize, both once embraced by the in crowd. so don't say you weren't warned.  A savvy person might begin to question the character of someone who allows another to be the mouthpiece.  Or keyboard piece. 

Let's cut to the chase.   I've never heard a preservation/traditional breeder ask for polled to be eliminated.  We asked for a division in the registry because polled IS dominant, the bloodlines have been so introgressed even experienced breeders have a lack of knowledge and information. . . . and this protects the horned bloodlines.   Why is this a threat?   I have gone so far to rant that they should be seperated into a seperate breed because it is frustrating banging my head against a polled wall!

Polled breeders fight this.  WHY?   Can I then assume that polled breeders will only be secure when every last traditional bloodline is gone. . . . lost to the breed?
Is that the ultimate goal?  Get rid of the real and what is left becomes the reality?

We have a crisis in the original horned bloodlines.   The mission statement of ADCA was " To protect the purity of Dexter cattle".  The very least the groups who designate themselves leaders of this breed could do would be . . . ... . protect the horned bloodlines that still exist by whatever means it takes.   WHY haven't they?

Because a preponderance of the leadership for the last ten years breed polled.  It is not in their interests to save the foundation horned cattle of the breed.
However, history will NOT be kind to the US Dexter leadership that permitted what is taking place to happen.  It will shown them to have had little leadership and even less foresight. 

 

Not really Kirk.  If you have ever crossed you would know better.   Most first generation crosses with a Dexter. . . . . especially a dwarf Dexter. .. . will look more like a Dexter than the Dexter does!  That is why questions usually don't raise their heads until the second generation or later. . . . . and then parentage verifies.  Any question, whether polled or color should have a two generation parentage requirement.   Not one.  I'm betting most of those polled "mutations" came off of scurred cows who were dehorned and the owners considered them horned cattle.

Judy