Genetics - Anyone have a clue

T

thebuckstopshere

Guest
I just read the thread that DesertEagle posted about a point restriction in Utah and I wanted to start a new thread relating to genetics. If you know nothing about genetics, please do not respond.

So many people say "large two points doing all the breeding ruined the herd." I get so tired of reading this. I don't know much about genetics, but I know enough to know that large two points don't do all the breeding and don't ruin a herd.

A buck deer breads a doe, and passes half the genes to the fawn. Thus, half the fawn's genes come from the doe. Of the genes passed from buck to fawn, there is no certainty that fawn will look like dad, just percentage probabilities. Can anyone explain how this really works?

Small two point yearlings do not equal large two points running around. Large two points are not the norm. I have yet to see a four point yearling. All bucks are spikes or two points at some point in their life.

I don't want a canned response. If anyone actually knows, lets here just how genetics affect a herd. Especially how the doe equates into the whole scenario.
 
I took upper level genetics last semester and got an 98% in the course. I'm double majored at University of Colorado at Boulder. I feel my knowledge of genetics are about the best reference of almost anyone on this site, no offense to anyone, i'm sure thier are others will great knowledge of genetics also.
As for does and bucks passing genes to thier offspring. It corrects that each parent passes half of thier chromosome set to the fawns, but thats not all that gets factored into the phenotype when looking at antler development. phenotype (physical appearence) = genotype (genetic compositon) + enviromental conditions + many variables.
Thier are many many factors that can influence antler development other that genetrics. I can try to answer more specific questions about genetic since it would take too long to summerize everything on this thread.
 
I'm not a genetics expert, but I play one on the internet. I only got a 97% on my semester genetics class so I will consider my self the second most qualified.

One of the key points noted above regarding headgear and genetics is the role habitat and groceries play in the equation. In areas with LESS PRESSURE and better HABITAT CONSERVATION and /or GROCERIES practice, like for instance, game farms and zoos, animals grow magnificent headgear. I think its no coincidence that limitd entry units grow great deer because the animal is given a statistically better chance of reaching his 4, 5, 6th birthdays where studies show prime antler growth as the byproduct.

Guys, we are hunters, not genetic experts. We can do our part by supporting groups like RMEF and the Mule deer folks to fight for habitat restoration and support Fish and Game groups when tags get reduced. The later group has a difficult task, they need to provide quality opportunities to hunters which have varying desires. Some of us want more deer and couldn't care less about age and antlers, others look for trophy opportunities. Its hard to believe both can be accomplished.
There has to be some compromise.

five_point_buck
C.B.C.S.
 
If I can say this:

__A__B_
A|AA AB
B|BA BB

Does it mean I get to post in this thread? :)


-DallanC
 
How about 7th grade science? I thought I would try out my punnett square skills too:

470ea41839991f7d.jpg


I know there are a lot of factors other than this simple dominant and recessive gene equation but there's no denying that natural selection and/or selective breeding can and does change characteristics within a species.

Don't forget that all female deer got half of their genes from there daddy, so if her daddy was a mature two-point than she'll likely pass that to here offspring just the same as a buck. Each generation can either dilute or strengthen any given trait. In the wild these things take place very very slowly, but you put man in the mix and we can speed things up (such as the cattle example in that other post).
 
That factor would work if the 2x2 is fully mature.
If the 2x2 buck is a two or three year old that would blow holes in the theory wouldn't it?
I think the "inferior" bucks most guys complain about are just young bucks that haven't had a chance to grow up yet.
HH
 
I'd expect a 1.5 yr old to be a 2 point. Older than that and still a 2 point is a malfunction, IMO.
 
i m o the buck decides male/female and the doe carries the stronger genes regarding size. spikes are inferior to 2 points at the 1.5 year mark these are branched antler animals and should branch their first year. has anyone ever seen a spike develop into a 4x4 by their third year? (just wondering) so please if you are in the position to pick between harvesting a spike or a 2point,do us all a favor take the lesser one.(this goes for elk too) they are both yearlings one isnt a better trophy than the other IMO no other qualifications than just spending time with the deer year after year
 
I don't know about genetics but I did save a bunch of money on my car insurance.
 
LMAO jmcenulty!!,
Dude, i was really getting into this post trying to learn something and it just got spolied reading your reply...i fell off my chair laughing my guts out!!

Sorry buckstopshere, you gotta admit that was damn funny!!




Skull Krazy
"No Bones About It"
 
A deers genetics don't change as it grows older. A two year old 2 point with the genotype 4X4 will still pass his genes on if he breeds at two years old or six years old. Either way his genes remain the same. One thing I find humorous is when hunters whine about ruining the gene pool because of all the big bucks being harvested, leaving only spikes and 2 points. The fact is, the genes for those large bucks are still there in those 2 points, they just need the nutrition and maturity to see their potential.................rf
 
Yea, that's gota be the funnies thing Ive read in months . . . LOL I'm still busting a gut, I cant even type. . . LOL
 
I went back and checked my class notes. I was way off. This is a research photo from the Helsinki Antler Institute research model of 1987. Studies proved this to be one way to increase antler point count and mass. 2 of 4 fawns will carry genetics for 7x7 racks (with eyeguards), the other two will move to San Francisco. All four offspring will be embarrassed by their parents when the other fawns show them this photo and will spend lots of taxpayer dollars on therapy.

gay-deer.jpg



five_point_buck
C.B.C.S.
 
Stop before I piss my pants. That's too funny. I had to show my wife and even she thought it was funny.
 
you know this would only happen in white tail population. The muleys are to tough..... though there is the whole brokeback mountain thing ;) that is a funny picture

anyway back to the point genetics does play a factor but with abundant feed and only older bucks (over 6) getting harvested the deer population would show a much greater size rack average.
 
Easy Krueger, it's just the internet. I'd hate to hear about a gennetics student who posted on MM going ballistic at the UofC and mowen' down some class mates. . . dude, you sound a bit fired up, relax a bit, even I dont get that fired up I and dont see people very often. . . .
 
The simplified answer is post#10. Good answer.

Post # 13 clearly explains why there are way more whitetail deer in America.

You guys that don't grasp the fact that just because a buck is young and not antlered up yet, is no sign that he isn't carrying a history of genepool from good stock. You probably still believe that you can tell a rattlesnakes age by the number of rattles it has......
 
easy fellas. its too simple to to think that so long as we have bucks, we have the potential for what WE consider GOOD bucks.

Over time, given enough lack of "proper" competition between the mature, and dominant bucks within the herd (and therefore immature or less than dominant bucks, even with "good" antler genes will do the breading), and enough genetic diversity and mixing of "outside" genes, into herds, the overall health of the herd will diminish and if you care at all about mule deer, this is more important than antler points from one year to the next over a relatively short time span, say 10 to 20 years. Sure, areas that once had "good" antlered bucks, that today do not due to over harvest, likely still have the potential to produce "good" antlered bucks, however, given enough time and enough continued pressure and selection the genetics will change. . .
 
I don't know as much about the scientific side, but I do know about proper management. Lets look at what some of the limited entry area's have done. If you take nothing but bucks all the time, eventually, no buck stands a chance. If you can get your herd to its full capasity, then take an equal amount of bucks and does, you keep the same buck to do ratio, but your quility goes up. If people are only getting a buck tag every other year, most of them are going to hold out for a better deer. If there are does tags availible, than the guys who just want to fill their freezer are going to be able to do that much more effiecently, plus, they are the guys who usually shoot the first deer that comes along. So, to some it all up, I think the short term goal would be to get deer numbers up, once the range has reached capacity, reduce the number of buck tags and open a antlerless hunt for the "meat guys." Then, if you broke the buck tags down by size, you would be able to manage the genetics as well as the numbers. Example: "management tags" which would be nothing greater than three points on one side. This would hopefully satisfy almost everyone. The meat guys are happy, the people who "just want to kill a buck" are happy, and the trophy guys are happy. Granted, you might only have a chance at a trophy tag every three years or so, but who honestly kills a true trophy year in and year out. Oh ya, Dedicated Hunters still get there two deer every three years, but only one of them is a trophy tag. Good? Bad? What do you think?
 
P.S. The three point or better thing could work if the guys who "accidently" shot two points, didn't have the book thrown at them. You would need check stations where these guys could check in there deer. Once the two point was brought in, they would pay and extra $20 bucks or something for the mistake. That way, the state makes more money to put towards wildlife, and you don't end up with a bunch of unused two points laying all over the mountain. When you make a law, you have to regulate it somehow, otherwise, it is just an "idea." Utah doesn't seem to do a whole lot of regulating. Maybe opening day of the rifle hunt, but other than that, not much. Most of these CWMU's that have good deer and elk numbers, not only regulate their herd, but they also see every animal killed. They weigh it, take jaw samples (age) and check its health. This provides them with extra information for there herd. Now, I understand that doing this on nine thousand deer (or whatever the numbers are) would be impossible. But if you at least looked at eighty percent of them and tested fifteen percent, you would have a lot better idea of what your herd was doing. Just my opinion, let the shooting begin.
 
Thanks for posting everyone - good info and laughs.

In trying to find out a little genetics info myself, I did find that Washington State University is doing some research into mule deer genetics. Interesting. If I find any further good info I will pass it along.
 
thebuckstopshere,
On a serious note. I have seen a lot of debate on this issue, whether there should be a point limit or not. Either max or min.
All I know is my boy shot his first buck year that was a 3x2 and I was the most happiest dad alive. I don't care if it was a "pisscutter".
I ain't no trophy hunter and never will be. Doesn't mean I won't try to get that "big" buck. For me it's a week out of the year where I can forget about life and spend some quality time with family and friends.
 
After reading the original post by thebuckstopshere, I ran away! After noticing so many posts, I thought "geez, there are a lot of genetic experts on here!" Then I began to read........
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
__________________________
"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." - John Wayne
 
dgwoody's idea is a good one just difficult to make work. would need to hire more d.o.w. dudes which would decrease available funds for habitat etc. so might need to increase price on tags.... it is a difficult situation to hash out. I think there should be an emphasis on age as well as points to really improve overall quality. I do agree there should be some sort of sliding scale to give people the opportunity to hunt for the deer they want (meat, small buck, trophy, or whatever) this might also increase the tags available for everybody concerned because they would only apply for what they want and deer herds could be managed much more accurately. just my thoughts
 
I'M HERE TO CLAIM THE TITLE!!!!

I have waited many years for this thread. I do indeed have the education necessary to say "I am a geneticist!" I could have instructed the poor students that scored 97 and 98% on their upper level genetics classes. I have an earned Ph.D. in Genetics from the University of Georgia (hence my user name). Now... please believe everything I say (please note I am just trying to be a bit cheeky here).

Genetics is indeed one third of what makes big bucks big, the other two being age and nutrition.

A few years ago, I killed a 1 1/2 year old bull elk that was a small 5-point, and a 1 1/2 year old 4x4 mule deer buck. These were "good genetic" animals. With age, I'm sure they would have been magnificent specimens.

Does and young bucks potentially carry the necessary genes required for large antlers. No it is not a sing gene that determines antler size, it is many genes working together. A yearling buck with good genetics can pass his genes along just as good as the coveted 30 incher, if allowed. However, population genetics can and is influenced by selection if the hunting restrictions/pressure is great enough. Just like breeding in domesticated livestock, selection of the best results in directional selection of the average. If inferior animals (genetically defined two or three points) are allowed to breed the does, the frequency of the inferior genes increases in the population. I believe this will occur in areas with antler restrictions where trophy 2-points are the dominant bucks which keep the good genetic young bucks from breeding. Its called evolution!

Any further questions, just send a message to the professor!
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom