LOCUST claims #1. ECBERT drops 40 points. ECUADOR crashes 98. December’s Italian rankings just reshuffled the deck.
Executive Summary: DENOVO LOCUST-ET seized Italy’s #1 international genomic ranking in December 2025, posting gPFT 5450 with +1,472 kg milk, +115 kg fat (+0.57%), and +96 kg protein. Domestic leader ECBERT retained his crown but dropped 40 points to gPFT 5349, while PINETA IRONGEN RASCASSE surged 42 points to become December’s top domestic mover. The proven sector delivered the cycle’s biggest story: The high-profile polled star KNO ECUADOR P plunged 98 points as daughter data corrected earlier projections, while ZFZ CRISALIS RF held firm at the top with gPFT 5180. Four international newcomers—HARMONY, SCOTTY, DREAMER, and THUMPING—broke the 5300 barrier. Eight Italian bulls debuted above gPFT 5070, signaling that domestic genetics are closing the gap. December’s lesson: the sires you banked on in August deserve a fresh evaluation today.
December’s evaluation crowned a new international leader—and exposed cracks in former favorites. DENOVO 23392 LOCUST-ET (Sire: LODI; MGS: CASCADE) claimed the number one position with a commanding gPFT of 5450, edging out previous contenders with exceptional production credentials: +1,472 kg Milk, +115 kg Fat (0.57%), and +96 kg Protein (0.40%).
Hot on his heels, PEAK VINDICATE-ET and PEAK SPELLBOUND-ET sit virtually tied at gPFT 5445, making the top three positions a photo finish separated by just five index points.
Fresh International Genetics Breaking Through
Several high-powered international sires made notable December debuts above the 5300 gPFT threshold :
KENYON-HILL OC-ET HARMONY (Harmony x Gameday) – gPFT 5386
ADAWAY SUNDANCE SCOTTY-ET (Sundance x Hayk) – gPFT 5374
KINGS-RANSOM O DREAMER-ET (Owen x Happen) – gPFT 5348
PROGENESIS THUMPING (Hipster x Frost Bite) – gPFT 5318
Domestic Drama: ECBERT Holds Top Spot Despite 40-Point Drop
Italy’s homegrown genomic leader ECBERT (Sire: GLADIUS; MGS: DATELINE) maintained his domestic crown but couldn’t avoid a 40-point index decline, falling from 5389 to 5349 gPFT. Meanwhile, PINETA IRONGEN RASCASSE ET surged upward with a +42 point gain to secure second position at gPFT 5321—the evaluation’s biggest domestic mover.
New Italian Sires Entering the Elite (gPFT ≥5070)
Bull Name
gPFT
Bull Name
gPFT
GPLUS HFP GP-OAKLAND
5247
INSEME TEX SURFER
5125
GGA INSEME JEGOLO
5151
WILDER INSEME FAKTOR
5095
FIS ENOLA-ET
5146
PALASSOTTO RIGHEIRA
5085
BELLAVISTA PEACE
5131
CRISTELLA NAZARIO ET
5077
Proven Sector: Stability at Top, Volatility Below
The daughter-proven rankings tell a more cautious story. ZFZ CRISALIS RF held firm as Italy’s top proven bull, ticking up slightly from 5169 to 5180 gPFT with a strong fat percentage (+0.16%). IDEVRA ROYAL INSEME CARLOMAGNO secured second place at gPFT 5068, delivering impressive milk volume (+1,568 kg) and solid longevity (105).
The proven sector’s headline loss: KNO ECUADOR P plummeted 98 points—from 4943 to 4845 gPFT—as additional daughter data recalibrated expectations. Conversely, ISOLABELLA DISTEFANO ET climbed 34 points to 4982 gPFT.
The Bottom Line
For breeders finalizing 2026 matings, December’s volatility demands one response: reassess before you commit. LOCUST’s emergence and ECBERT’s decline demonstrate why continuous index monitoring matters more than ever. For breeders targeting the Italian market, December’s evaluation reinforces that international genetics continue to set the pace—but domestic programs are closing the gap fast.
Data Source: ANAFIBJ December 2025 Italian Holstein Genetic Evaluations
Key Takeaways:
LOCUST seizes #1: DENOVO LOCUST-ET tops Italy’s international genomics at gPFT 5450 with +1,472 kg milk, +115 kg fat, and +96 kg protein
ECBERT drops 40 points: Domestic leader holds #1 but bleeds index value while PINETA IRONGEN RASCASSE surges 42 points behind him
ECUADOR plunges 98 points: December’s proven-sector collapse proves daughter data can shatter genomic confidence overnight
12 new elite sires debut: Four international bulls cracked gPFT 5300; eight Italian bulls entered above 5070—fresh firepower for 2026 matings
Your August picks need a December review: Index swings this size reward breeders who adapt, not those married to last cycle’s rankings
Join over 30,000 successful dairy professionals who rely on Bullvine Weekly for their competitive edge. Delivered directly to your inbox each week, our exclusive industry insights help you make smarter decisions while saving precious hours every week. Never miss critical updates on milk production trends, breakthrough technologies, and profit-boosting strategies that top producers are already implementing. Subscribe now to transform your dairy operation’s efficiency and profitability—your future success is just one click away.
Every 1% increase in inbreeding costs you $23 per cow—and most herds don’t even know their levels.
We’ve uncovered something that’ll make you rethink every breeding decision you’re making. Genomic selection doubled our genetic gains to per cow annually, but it’s created a billion inbreeding tax that’s quietly draining operations nationwide. Here’s the math that matters: every 1% increase in genomic inbreeding costs about per cow in lost lifetime profit, and Holstein levels have jumped from 5% to over 15% in just fifteen years. Meanwhile, five companies now control nearly 90% of the elite genetics market, using restrictive contracts to keep the best bloodlines in their own pipelines. The producers who start building genetic independence now, while outcross options are still available, will have the most resilient and profitable herds by 2030. Time to stop following the crowd and start protecting your genetic future.
Rising inbreeding coefficients in Holstein cattle since genomic selection began in 2009, with corresponding economic costs calculated at $23 per 1% inbreeding increase
Three Critical Things Every Producer Needs to Know Right Now
Genomic selection doubled our genetic gains from $40 to $85 annually per cow in Net Merit—sounds great, right? But here’s what nobody talks about…
Genomic inbreeding levels shot from 5% to over 15% in just fifteen years, creating a hidden tax of $23 per cow per percentage point. That’s potentially $230 lost per cow over her lifetime.
Five companies now control nearly 90% of elite genetics, yet they’re all selling us essentially the same bloodlines under different names.
The math is brutal when you scale it up. A 500-cow herd averaging 12% inbreeding is bleeding roughly $80,500 annually compared to herds maintaining 5% inbreeding levels. That’s real money walking out your barn door every day.
The coffee-break test: are the same grandsires showing up everywhere?
Grab the last 50 breedings and map sires back two generations; if “Captain,” “Lionel,” “Frazzled,” or “Medley” keep popping up, that déjà vu isn’t a coincidence—it’s what concentrated genomic selection looks like when the whole market chases the same leaderboard. The financial math is simple enough to make a nutritionist wince: at $23 per 1% inbreeding, a 300-cow herd moving from 5% to 12% is quietly leaving roughly $48,300–$69,000 on the table over those cows’ lifetimes, and that’s before counting the drag on productive life and calving intervals that comes with each tick upward.
How the genomic promise became a trap—fast
The thing about 2009–2010 is that progeny testing’s long wait time suddenly became, well, optional: hair sample in, predictions out, generation intervals shrank, and selection intensity went through the roof, which is exactly why genetic gain jumped from ~ to ~ per year. What strikes many producers in hindsight is how standardized indices and the speed of genomic turnover trained everyone on the same targets at the same time, so the “best” bulls were used everywhere—by design—driving a rapid, global convergence around a narrow set of families.
The genomic selection revolution doubled annual genetic gain in Holstein cattle but came at the cost of reduced effective population size, highlighting the fundamental trade-off between rapid progress and genetic diversity
Follow the incentives: concentrated suppliers, concentrated pedigrees
Here’s what’s interesting when you line up the genomic NM$ lists: STgenetics now commands about 53.5% of the genomic NM$ sire share, with the other majors making up most of the rest—a pretty strong signal that the elite sire stream runs through just a few gates. Price reinforces the funnel: value-based pricing ties semen cost to index standing, so rational buyers who want higher herd profitability are nudged to pile into the same top sires—again and again—tightening pedigree overlap as a side effect of “doing the smart thing.”
The contract loop: control doesn’t end at the tank
What’s particularly noteworthy is how early-access or VIP semen agreements can limit resale, restrict use to the buyer’s herd, and even reserve first option on exceptional progeny, which keeps the very best genetics circling back to internal pipelines while everyone else gets the later waves. It creates a two-speed market: a nucleus racing ahead on the newest lines and a broader commercial base buying in after those lines already saturate—pushing inbreeding faster within and across regions than pedigree tools alone will show.
The regional reality check producers keep bringing up
Upper Midwest: large Wisconsin and Minnesota herds often show eerily similar sire stacks despite different nutritionists and management styles—proof of how the same handful of bull families can dominate selection decisions regionally when everyone buys off the same lists. Central Valley: California operations battling heat and water variability point out that many top-index bulls weren’t bred for their climate; producers who need “slick”/heat-tolerant or pasture-efficient genetics still find the elite commercial stream light on those outcross options. Southeast: Georgia and Florida dairies working through heat, humidity, and parasites are increasingly experimenting with crossbreeding and genuine outcross bulls—quietly—because the high-input, confinement-optimized mainstream isn’t built for their reality.
The case that should still give everyone pause: Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief
The legendary sire Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief. His genetics advanced production for millions, but his widespread use also spread a lethal recessive gene, highlighting the costly hidden risks of a narrow gene pool.
Chief’s influence was historic—16,000 daughters and millions of descendants—but baked into that legacy was HH1, a lethal APAF1 nonsense mutation that, when homozygous, produced a devastating number of spontaneous abortions across the breed. Between 2016 documentation and subsequent reporting, the best estimates now peg global losses at roughly half a million calf abortions and hundreds of millions of dollars in cost—while his production upside still made him a net positive, which is exactly the cultural trap: normalize the risk as “manageable.” (Read more: The $4,300 Gamble That Reshaped Global Dairy Industry: The Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief Story)
Why pedigree tools understate today’s risk—and how genomic F_ROH tells the real story
EFI and F_ROH represent two fundamentally different approaches to measuring inbreeding that dairy breeders need to understand and use together for optimal breeding decisions. EFI (Expected Future Inbreeding) is a relative, forward-looking measure that estimates how inbred offspring would be if an animal were mated to the general population—essentially measuring how related that animal is to today’s breed average. However, EFI has a critical flaw: it uses a constantly shifting baseline that becomes more inbred each year, meaning an animal can appear “low inbreeding” simply because the entire population has become more inbred around it. In contrast, F_ROH measures the actual homozygosity present in an individual’s DNA right now—the real stretches of identical genetic material that indicate true genomic inbreeding, regardless of population trends. For practical breeding decisions, savvy dairy producers should use EFI for population-level planning and relative comparisons within their current genetic pool, while relying on F_ROH to understand the absolute genomic risk and long-term genetic health of their animals. Think of EFI as your “how does this bull compare to others available today” tool, while F_ROH tells you “how much genetic diversity has this animal actually lost”—and with Holstein genomic inbreeding having tripled from 5% to 15% in just 10 years while EFI metrics lagged behind, using both measures together gives breeders the complete picture they need to avoid painting themselves into a genetic corner.
Low Inbreeding Sires in the top 200 gTPI to consider:
Naab Code
Reg Name
TPI
Net Merit
PTA Milk
PTA Fat
% Fat
PTA Pro
% Pro
PTA Type
Sire x MGS x MGGS
515HO00587
Ruann Northstar-ET
3427
911
1323
99
0.16
59
0.06
1.01
Gen Percival x Gameday x Rapid
250HO17387
Aurora Sheepster POplar-ET
3421
829
862
90
0.2
43
0.05
1.05
Sheepster x Ahead x Medley
014HO17945
Wet Sheepster Madcap-ET
3415
945
683
93
0.24
48
0.09
0.62
Sheepster x Gameday x Renegade
007HO17807
Matcrest Sundance Ledger-ET
3399
966
809
104
0.26
47
0.08
0.84
Sundance x Payload x Renegade
200HO13425
Beyond Nightingale
3397
857
680
83
0.2
46
0.09
1.17
Harmony x Esquire x Parsly
200HO13174
Adaway Beyond Fitness-ET
3392
908
1153
92
0.16
60
0.08
0.63
Sheepster x Parsly x TRy Me
007HO17380
Melarry Sheepster Dijon-ET
3381
937
1612
105
0.14
68
0.05
0.52
Sheepster x Drive x TRy Me
202HO02006
TRophy-ET
3380
742
394
73
0.21
43
0.11
0.94
TRooper x Spot Lite x Renegade
551HO06233
Genosource Maritime-ET
3380
1019
1301
97
0.16
54
0.04
0.58
Undertone x Upside x Captain
029HO22342
Pine-TRee Mervyn-ET
3378
989
1264
113
0.22
57
0.06
0.02
Mirrorimage x Foxcatcher x Legendary
The reality is that most of today’s highest-ranking sires likely have elevated F_ROH values because 90% of the top genomic bulls trace back to Oman, Planet, or Shottle in their first few generations. This concentration means finding truly outcross sires among the elite ranks is increasingly difficult.
Producers who believe they’re “mixing it up” with pedigrees are often shocked when genomic runs of homozygosity (F_ROH) uncover more overlap than expected, especially post-2010, as generation intervals tightened and popular sires cycled faster. Studies show that pedigree-based inbreeding underestimates true autozygosity. Meanwhile, ROH trends in North American Holsteins rose sharply through the genomic era—resulting in more small ROH per year—and the last five years of the 1990–2016 period nearly doubled prior rates.
The hidden ledger lines producers actually feel—every season
From industry observations and Holstein/extension economics, each 1% inbreeding pings profitability by about $23 per cow in lifetime Net Merit, while correlated effects—milk yield drags, shorter productive life, and stretched calving intervals—compound quietly across cohorts. When you aggregate that across 500–1,000 cows, the numbers move from “annoying” to “we should fix this now,” especially if replacements are tight and every fresh cow’s butterfat checks are paying the feed bill this month.
A practical 30-day audit producers are using this fall
Week 1: Pull 100 recent services and map three generations; flag repeat grandsires and calculate genomic inbreeding if available through herd tools or nominator portals tied into CDCB pipelines.
Week 2: Run the inbreeding tax math at $23 per 1% and project five-year costs; identify the top five most related families in the herd and where they sit in production and health.
Week 3: Shortlist genuine outcross sires (yes, some will be 100–200 points lower on index) and heat/pasture-adapted options for stress seasons; check cooperative or European sources where appropriate.
Week 4: Set genomic inbreeding targets (<8% herd average is a good working mark), define a portfolio breeding plan for the next 90 days, and lock in performance tracking beyond yield—DPR, mastitis events, days open.
The portfolio breeding approach—used by herds that won’t trade tomorrow for today
What’s working in the field is a 40–40–20 split: forty percent “income insurance” on proven, high-index bulls for the best cows in optimal windows; forty percent balanced performers from less-related families; and twenty percent true diversity builders—outcross or strategic crossbreeding to bank hybrid vigor. On timing, spring is a great window for diversity (fresh cows, better heats); in summer heat, some herds test heat-tolerant outcrosses precisely because conception is lower anyway; and in fall, producers blend a higher percentage of index leaders to set up spring calving while keeping 30–40% in the diversity lane.
The tech curve by 2030—what actually looks useful on-farm
CDCB and national partners continue to expand trait coverage and data quality in the National Cooperator Database—now powering evaluations on tens of millions of animals—which is the backbone for making inbreeding and diversity metrics more visible in everyday tools. Expect two practical shifts: breeder-facing dashboards that surface F_ROH and “relatedness risk” at mating-time, and multi-objective AI suggestions that trade a modest drop in index points for measurable herd-level gains in fertility, livability, and inbreeding control.
The Bottom Line
First, write a hard target for genomic inbreeding and enforce it at mating-time with tools tied to CDCB-powered data; don’t let the last click be a guess. Second, treat outcross doses like an insurance premium: they don’t always top the list, but they pay when volatility hits—heat waves, disease pressure, or a hidden recessive hiding in plain sight like HH1 did. Third, negotiate “diversity bundles” or step outside the usual catalogs—cooperative and European options exist—and remember that saving $115 per cow by avoiding 5% extra inbreeding beats chasing 100 index points that never make it to your milk check.
Why this matters more than it feels like it should
Producers don’t feel inbreeding depression in one big wreck; it shows up in a few more open cows, a mastitis flare that pushes great cows out a lactation early, or a herd that just doesn’t breed back like it used to—and by the time it’s obvious, it’s expensive to unwind. The evidence points to a simple truth: a little less index today, with diversity baked in, often pays more in three years than another lap around the same pedigrees ever will.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Your inbreeding level is costing you real money right now — Calculate your herd’s genomic inbreeding using CDCB-linked tools, then multiply each percentage point above 5% by $23 per cow to see what you’re losing annually
Break free from the genetic funnel with portfolio breeding — Mix 40% proven high-index bulls, 40% solid performers from different families, and 20% true outcross genetics to hedge your bets and boost long-term profitability
Demand transparency from your AI providers — Ask for genomic relationship data, challenge restrictive contracts, and consider cooperative breeding programs that put farmer interests ahead of corporate profits
Track what actually pays the bills long-term — Monitor fertility rates, productive life, and mastitis alongside milk weights because the cows that stay healthy and breed back are the ones generating real profit per stall
Join the Revolution!
Join over 30,000 successful dairy professionals who rely on Bullvine Weekly for their competitive edge. Delivered directly to your inbox each week, our exclusive industry insights help you make smarter decisions while saving precious hours every week. Never miss critical updates on milk production trends, breakthrough technologies, and profit-boosting strategies that top producers are already implementing. Subscribe now to transform your dairy operation’s efficiency and profitability—your future success is just one click away.
Learn More:
Boost Your Dairy Profits: Proven Breeding Strategies Every Farmer Must Know – This article provides tactical advice on sire selection, heat detection, and using sexed and beef semen. It offers practical strategies for improving conception rates and calf value, directly complementing the main article’s call for a more diverse breeding portfolio.
Unlock Hidden Dairy Profits Through Lifetime Efficiency – Shifting to a strategic, long-term view, this piece reveals how integrating genetics with precision nutrition creates significant financial gains. It demonstrates how to cut feed costs and boost margins, reinforcing the main article’s theme of finding profitability beyond index chasing.
Genomics Meets Artificial Intelligence: Transforming Dairy Cattle Breeding Strategies – Looking to the future, this article explores how AI is revolutionizing genomic data analysis. It details how emerging technologies can help execute the complex, multi-objective breeding strategies needed to manage inbreeding risk and enhance long-term herd resilience and profitability.
Overdrive son crushes it while former leaders take a hit in August evaluations
Executive Summary: Italy just dropped their August genetic evaluations and Peak Spellbound-ET jumped to #1 with his impressive +1.07% fat and +0.54% protein, while former top dog Peak Vindicate-ET fell 20 points to second place. But here’s the kicker – Cookiecutter Hadley-ET went from #2 to #10, losing 102 points in one round. Meanwhile, the proven bulls? Rock steady. ZFZ Crisalis RF actually gained 29 points and strengthened his #1 proven position with that killer +1.95 udder composite. The Italians are obsessed with cheese production profits (their ICS-PR€ index), and guess what – the bulls ranking highest on both genomic and economic merit are the ones staying power. You want my advice? Start weighting proven performance heavier in your breeding decisions, especially with feed costs still brutal in 2025.
The August Italian genetic evaluations just dropped, and honestly? The reshuffling is pretty dramatic. Peak Spellbound-ET came out of nowhere to grab the #1 spot among international genomic bulls with a gPFT of 5458. This Overdrive son is putting up some serious numbers – +1.07% fat and +0.54% protein – which explains why Italian cheesemakers are paying attention.
But here’s what’s really catching my eye: while the genomic bulls are bouncing around like ping-pong balls, the proven bulls are sitting pretty with much more stability. Makes you wonder if we’re getting a little too excited about these genomic predictions, doesn’t it?
The Genomic Roller Coaster Continues
Rank
Bull Name
Sire
gPFT
ICS-PR€
Milk kg
Fat %
Protein %
AI Center
1
Peak Spellbound-ET
Overdrive
5458
1290
940
1.07
0.54
Novagen S.R.L.
2
Peak Vindicate-ET
Samson
5445
1385
1628
0.72
0.35
Novagen S.R.L.
3
Danhof Calculus-ET
Owen
5438
1258
1654
0.57
0.32
Semex Italia SRL
4
Smartie P-ET
Sega P RDC
5417
1398
1541
0.22
0.37
Novagen S.R.L.
5
Delta Morgan
Gladius
5394
1171
1810
0.21
0.31
Novagen S.R.L.
6
Peak Altasafezone-ET
Overdrive
5382
1501
1220
0.73
0.43
Alta Italia – MI
7
Peak Powerhouse-ET
Wheelhouse
5346
1240
1792
0.65
0.36
Novagen S.R.L.
8
Progenesis Vivify-ET
Royalflush
5334
1368
1258
0.42
0.25
Semex Italia SRL
9
OCD Rad Lightsaber-ET
Rad
5333
1244
2056
0.59
0.21
ST Gen Group
10
Cookiecutter Hadley-ET
Pattern
5332
1131
1657
0.83
0.27
Semex Italia SRL
Top 10 Foreign Genomic Bulls – August 2025
Peak Vindicate-ET, who was sitting pretty at #1 back in April, dropped to second place. Not a disaster by any means – he’s still at 5445 gPFT – but that’s a 20-point slide. This Samson son from Zemini bloodlines is still delivering solid milk production at 1628 kg with an impressive ICS-PR€ of 1385. The Italians love that cheese production index, and for good reason.
The real shocker? Cookiecutter Hadley-ET absolutely tanked from #2 in April all the way down to #10 in August. We’re talking about a 102-point drop here – from 5434 down to 5332. That’s the kind of volatility that should make any breeder nervous about putting all their eggs in one genomic basket.
What strikes me about these swings is how they contrast with the proven bull rankings. ZFZ Crisalis RF actually gained 29 points and strengthened his hold on the #1 proven spot. This Gywer son is showing what real daughter data looks like – +1.95 udder composite and solid type traits that actually hold up over time.
Rank
Bull Name
Sire
gPFT
ICS-PR€
Milk kg
Fat %
Protein %
AI Center
1
ZFZ Crisalis RF
Gywer
5169
921
1276
0.17
0.19
Intermizoo – PD
2
Idevra Royal Inseme Carlomagno
Bramante
5062
858
1539
0.07
0.27
Inseme
3
Isolabella Distefano ET
Hothand
4948
872
638
0.22
0.24
Italian Genetics
4
KNO Ecuador P
Hothand
4943
839
1374
0.05
0.22
Intermizoo – PD
5
K&L RM Inseme Barone Rosso R
Santorius
4844
354
992
0.09
0.25
Italian Genetics
6
All.Nure Wendat
Einstein
4837
919
1206
0.18
0.24
Intermizoo – PD
7
Smirne
Supreme
4832
867
643
0.16
0.25
Intermizoo – PD
8
SFH Redshift R
Gywer
4815
847
1545
-0.08
0.05
Intermizoo – PD
9
Wilder Holocron
Aristocrat
4812
623
817
0.23
0.33
Intermizoo – PD
10
Dotti Dorando
Letsgo
4780
895
585
0.13
0.24
Intermizoo – PD
Top 10 Italian Proven Bulls – August 2025
The Overdrive Factor
Peak Spellbound’s rise to the top signals something interesting happening with the Overdrive bloodline in Italian programs. His ICS-PR€ of 1290 puts him right in the sweet spot for Italian dairy operations focused on cheese production. When you’re dealing with Parmigiano-Reggiano and Gorgonzola, those component percentages matter more than raw volume.
Peak Altasafezone-ET, another Overdrive son sitting at #6 with 5382 gPFT, is showing similar strengths. The economic merit on that bull is even stronger – ICS-PR€ of 1501. That’s the kind of number that gets Italian producers’ attention, especially with feed costs still brutal in 2025.
The thing about Overdrive genetics… they’re delivering this combination of components and economics that works really well for the Italian market. But I keep coming back to the volatility issue. These genomic predictions are jumping around based on relatively small daughter groups, while the proven bulls with thousands of daughters are showing much more consistency.
Proven Performance Tells a Different Story
While genomic bulls are doing their volatility dance, the proven rankings tell a more stable story. ZFZ Crisalis RF moved from 5140 to 5169 gPFT between April and August. That’s real improvement based on actual daughters in real herds.
Idevra Royal Inseme Carlomagno held steady at #2 with only a 3-point drop to 5062. This Bramante son continues putting up solid milk production numbers – 1539 kg – with the kind of consistency you want to see from proven genetics.
What’s particularly noteworthy is Isolabella Distefano ET jumping 43 points to secure #3 at 4948 gPFT. This Hothand son is showing exceptional type traits with a +2.93 udder composite. Those are the kind of numbers that translate to longevity in commercial herds.
The Economics Tell the Real Story
Here’s what I find fascinating about the Italian system – they’re putting serious weight on economic merit through their ICS-PR€ index. Smartie P-ET leads all bulls with matching IES€ and ICS-PR€ values of 1398. That kind of balance between total merit and cheese production profit is exactly what Italian operations need.
The proven bulls average around 800-900 ICS-PR€, while the top genomic bulls are pushing 1200-1400. Either the genomic predictions are overly optimistic, or we’re seeing some real genetic progress. Given the volatility we’re witnessing, I’m leaning toward the former.
Bloodline Diversification Continues
Owen, Samson, and Overdrive sons are all making strong showings in the top rankings. Danhof Calculus-ET and Progenesis Pellegrino, both Owen sons, are performing particularly well in milk production traits. The maternal grandsire diversity is providing some balance to these genetic packages, which is encouraging.
But here’s the thing – we’re seeing the same sire lines dominating across multiple countries. That concentration should make us nervous about long-term genetic diversity, especially when genomic predictions are driving so much of the selection pressure.
What This Means for Your Program
If you’re looking at these Italian evaluations for breeding decisions, here’s my take: Weight the proven performance much more heavily than these genomic predictions. Peak Spellbound might be #1 today, but will he still be there in December? The 102-point drop for Cookiecutter Hadley suggests probably not.
The proven bulls like ZFZ Crisalis RF are showing the kind of consistency that translates to profitable daughters. When you’re dealing with real farms, real feed costs, and real milk prices, that stability matters more than chasing the latest genomic superstar.
For Italian operations specifically, those ICS-PR€ numbers are critical. Don’t get distracted by flashy gPFT scores if the economic merit isn’t there. Cheese production profitability is what pays the bills, especially in today’s economic environment.
The volatility we’re seeing in these genomic rankings should be a wake-up call. We’re making multi-generational breeding decisions based on predictions that can swing 100+ points in a single evaluation. That’s not the foundation for sustainable genetic progress – it’s speculation.
Focus on proven performance, diversify your genetics, and remember that consistency often beats peak performance when you’re building a sustainable dairy operation.
Editorial Note: Following publication, ANAFIBJ Technical Coordinator Maurizio Marusi provided important statistical context regarding the evaluation changes highlighted in this article. Key technical clarifications include:
The correlation between April and August genomic evaluations was 99%, indicating high consistency in the underlying genetic predictions– The standard deviation of the genomic gPFT index is 700 points, meaning the 100-point changes discussed represent approximately 1/7 of a standard deviation – well within normal statistical expectations for genomic evaluations– The differential between genomic and proven bull averages in Italy (TOP 20 genomic: 1108-1325 ICS-PR vs. TOP 20 proven: 827-1067 ICS-PR) is comparable to similar differentials seen in other international systems, including the United States– Ranking changes of 8 positions with minimal genetic value differences should be interpreted within the context of 75% reliability levels and the addition of competitive new bulls to the genomic pool
These statistical insights provide important context for interpreting genomic evaluation movements and underscore the importance of understanding the technical framework underlying these genetic predictions. We appreciate ANAFIBJ’s commitment to transparency and technical accuracy in their evaluation system.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.