Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mississippi State Study

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Mississippi State Study

    I was just listening to the HUNTR podcast featuring Dr. Strickland. On this episode they discussed all things deer but one part that stood out to me was this study from 2017. The study sought to determine genetics role in deer body size and buck antler size. The theory was presented in the podcast as “…if genetic predisposition determines body and antler size, the deer will show obvious differences when fed the same diet..”. Years ago when deer were essentially locally extinct in many parts of Mississippi, deer were captured from the Midwest, north east, then Texas and Mexico to support stocking efforts in Mississippi. Adding to the proposed theory or idea that where the deer came from could be an influence on body/antler size. The MSU research lab then captured deer from three regions of Mississippi. The Delta, the “Thin Loess” and the coastal plains. Pregnant does that were captured were dismissed from the study once they gave birth to their fawns (quote from the podcast). The study found that within one generation of optimal nutrition, deer from each region of the state grew to above average weights, and antlers of all bucks averaged B&C higher than the regions they came from, predominately matching deer of the delta (area with the highest amount of nutrition in the state).

    So the conclusion could be semi determined as genetics do not have a greater influence than nutrition. I found it quite hilarious that I came across this because I was at my lease recently and was told deer were brought in from the east coast years back, and that they have large bodies and small basket antlers so we need to get rid of them. I’m not saying that person is right or wrong but I found it interesting this study kind of argues against that. Do you agree with the MSU study?




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    #2
    Look what Elgato has accomplished with just nutrition and age class! I just wish I had deep enough pockets to feed my deer everything they could handle

    Comment


      #3
      age and nutrition is all they need to be big.
      Hunting is a business and corn is cheap.

      Think what would happen in Texas if instead of corn Protein was cheap and easy to be feed(business oppty) Think of how many tons of protein would be put out to the deer.

      You would see a huge jump in a few years.

      Comment


        #4
        El Gato’s place is very well documented proof that they just need time and nutrition.

        Comment


          #5
          Although its a common cop-out, 'poor genetics' just means poor management.

          Comment


            #6
            I'm gonna call bs on the study. Genetics apply to horses, cattle, sheep, goats, hogs, cats, dogs, chickens, ......... and people. But deer are the exception!! I don't think so.

            Comment


              #7
              It all depends on what you goals are. They are using their typical side antler development and using it as a base line. What if typical mature buck is 110”? Is that your goal to get over 110”?

              There are definitely populations that genetics has an adverse effect if you are trying to raise consistent B&C deer. This can be seen in all regions of the state.

              That being said and the older I get, I also believe it is near impossible to “cull” genetics out of a free range herd.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Greenheadless View Post

                That being said and the older I get, I also believe it is near impossible to “cull” genetics out of a free range herd.
                But you can add genetics.

                Comment


                  #9
                  The study did say that genetics and epigenetics play some role. If the nutrition is lacking the deer will be poor quality regardless of genetics. Gotta flip the genetic switches with nutrition.

                  Thanks for posting the study MrHighwayHunter.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Walker View Post
                    But you can add genetics.
                    Not sure your point.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Greenheadless View Post
                      Not sure your point.
                      He's saying that while you can't improve genetics through selective harvest, you can improve genetics by buying deer and adding them to a herd. But, this is only partially true. You can add deer that have been selectively bred for large antlers, but that doesn't necessarily change the genetic capability of the deer herd as a whole.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        On the cuff this is what I thought his response meant, but, didn’t want to assume. I think it would be hard to introduce genetics to a free range herd being a state resource and all. I am not sure you can just go out, buy deer and release them as you see fit into the wild population, but may be wrong.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Just my ignorant observation of a region not know for big deer:

                          The confluence of the Pecos and the Rio Grande rivers. Located in Val Verde county which is consider the western fringes of the hill country wildlife district as it transitions into the trans pecos wildlife district. This is how TPWD’s website (https://tpwd.texas.gov/landwater/lan...os/regulatory/ )describes it anyway. Neither of these two regions would be consider trophy wt hunting areas IMHO.

                          Deer on the Mexican side of the river, Rancho La Pistola are huge. I say this due to both my observation of the biggest deer I have seen in VV county and by what hunters of that ranch have told me. One hunter said, we find 150 to 160 class deer dead of old age. He then mentioned that they aren’t even feeding protein yet. In my time both patrolling the rio grand and running hundreds of cameras in that area this again is where I have seen the biggest deer.

                          Take this for what it’s worth; I am no scientist just a deer hunter that made these observation over a decade of time in that area.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Greenheadless View Post
                            There are definitely populations that genetics has an adverse effect if you are trying to raise consistent B&C deer. This can be seen in all regions of the state.
                            While this is true, I don't think I'd characterize that as adverse. Deer evolved and are genetically adapted to the environment that they live in; certain habitat, environmental, and climatic factors. In some areas, this may mean larger or smaller antlers. But these days, folks don't really care what is supposed to be there, they want to manage for what THEY want, which of course is unnaturally-large antlers. Why folks can't be happy with the way things are is beyond me. I don't care where you are, if you just manage population numbers, keep a relatively tight sex ratio, and an even age distribution, the deer herd will produce the quality of animals that should be expressed. Because antler development should follow the standard normal distribution, some of those bucks will be larger and some will be smaller.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Deerguy View Post
                              While this is true, I don't think I'd characterize that as adverse. Deer evolved and are genetically adapted to the environment that they live in; certain habitat, environmental, and climatic factors. In some areas, this may mean larger or smaller antlers. But these days, folks don't really care what is supposed to be there, they want to manage for what THEY want, which of course is unnaturally-large antlers. Why folks can't be happy with the way things are is beyond me. I don't care where you are, if you just manage population numbers, keep a relatively tight sex ratio, and an even age distribution, the deer herd will produce the quality of animals that should be expressed. Because antler development should follow the standard normal distribution, some of those bucks will be larger and some will be smaller.
                              I can’t disagree with this.

                              If wanting a place to consistently produce B&C potential, this cannot be overlooked though. Just have to manage your expectations accordingly.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X