PSX-13 Assessment of bull buying behavior using a simulated bull auction

Abstract The bull buying behavior of Iowa cattle producers was assessed using an online simulated bull auction. Participants (n = 45) were asked a series of questions to determine the bull type they wished to bid on and the purchase price for the bull. Questions included the breeding objective of the producer and whether the bull would be bred to heifers. Participants were asked to identify the breed of bull they were interested in purchasing, the traits that were the most important to their breeding objective, and the maximum amount that they would be willing to pay. Once the buyer information was complete, the responses were randomly redistributed to other participants. As a result, a participant would receive the buyer information from another individual involved in the simulated bull auction. At this point, the participant role would change from buyer to bidder. A list of 70 bulls with expected progeny differences (EPD) was provided to each participant, and the simulated bull auction was accessed through an online auction platform via cell phones. Participants bid for bulls on behalf of the instructions of the buyer. After the sale, the bidder was asked if they were able to purchase the bull to fit the criteria requested by the buyer and if it was purchased within the given price range. The purchase information was returned to the original participant (i.e., the buyer). The buyer then stated if they were satisfied with the purchased bull. Questionnaires were collected, and information was compiled. The most common breeding objectives were replacement heifers, feeder calves, fed cattle, and profit. Important traits for purchasing a bull were calving ease direct, yearling weight, terminal traits, and docility. Only 16 participants indicated using indexes for selection. Criteria for removing a bull from consideration included low EPD for calving ease direct and docility, and if the bull was horned. Poor index values were listed by 9 participants as a reason to eliminate a bull. Responses from participants as the bidder, 83.7% indicated that the bull was purchased within the provided price range, while 16.3% were unable to purchase a desired bull within the given price range. When asked why the bidder bid on a specific bull, 28 stated the bull met the EPD profile, 16 stated the bull was in the correct price range, seven bulls met a phenotypic profile, and five bulls were purchased due to the bidder running out of time. Of the bulls purchased, 80% of the buyers were satisfied with the bull purchased by the bidder. The results from this simulated bull auction provide insight into tools and methods used by cattle producers when purchasing bulls and what, if any, genetics tools for selection are being used.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Animal Science
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skae234.675
Primary Topic
Supply Chain and Inventory Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

PSX-13 Assessment of bull buying behavior using a simulated bull auction

Charles C. Martinez, Miranda M Culbertson, Troy N. Rowan
Journal of Animal Science
Supply Chain and Inventory Management
article

PSX-13 Assessment of bull buying behavior using a simulated bull auction

Charles C. Martinez, Miranda M Culbertson, Troy N. Rowan
article en

Abstract

Abstract The bull buying behavior of Iowa cattle producers was assessed using an online simulated bull auction. Participants (n = 45) were asked a series of questions to determine the bull type they wished to bid on and the purchase price for the bull. Questions included the breeding objective of the producer and whether the bull would be bred to heifers. Participants were asked to identify the breed of bull they were interested in purchasing, the traits that were the most important to their breeding objective, and the maximum amount that they would be willing to pay. Once the buyer information was complete, the responses were randomly redistributed to other participants. As a result, a participant would receive the buyer information from another individual involved in the simulated bull auction. At this point, the participant role would change from buyer to bidder. A list of 70 bulls with expected progeny differences (EPD) was provided to each participant, and the simulated bull auction was accessed through an online auction platform via cell phones. Participants bid for bulls on behalf of the instructions of the buyer. After the sale, the bidder was asked if they were able to purchase the bull to fit the criteria requested by the buyer and if it was purchased within the given price range. The purchase information was returned to the original participant (i.e., the buyer). The buyer then stated if they were satisfied with the purchased bull. Questionnaires were collected, and information was compiled. The most common breeding objectives were replacement heifers, feeder calves, fed cattle, and profit. Important traits for purchasing a bull were calving ease direct, yearling weight, terminal traits, and docility. Only 16 participants indicated using indexes for selection. Criteria for removing a bull from consideration included low EPD for calving ease direct and docility, and if the bull was horned. Poor index values were listed by 9 participants as a reason to eliminate a bull. Responses from participants as the bidder, 83.7% indicated that the bull was purchased within the provided price range, while 16.3% were unable to purchase a desired bull within the given price range. When asked why the bidder bid on a specific bull, 28 stated the bull met the EPD profile, 16 stated the bull was in the correct price range, seven bulls met a phenotypic profile, and five bulls were purchased due to the bidder running out of time. Of the bulls purchased, 80% of the buyers were satisfied with the bull purchased by the bidder. The results from this simulated bull auction provide insight into tools and methods used by cattle producers when purchasing bulls and what, if any, genetics tools for selection are being used.

Journal of Animal ScienceVol. 102(Supplement_3)
Iowa State University (US), University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Supply Chain and Inventory Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.