make a booking

Call Gerald on (07) 4129 7029 to book an evaluation or click here to fill out an online booking enquiry.

come and see us
Why not call into one of our farms and see the results for yourself. Just send us an email or give us a ring and arrange a time to suit...

Call Gerald on
(07) 4129 7029

Scientific Evidence - Research

Science has provided us with many answers to what happens when animals are bred in a certain way or eat certain foods etc. However, there is still a great deal of information about livestock production that has not been scientifically diagnosed as yet and has been handed down through generations of stockmen and is still very important to the industry.

Part of the CLMS system has been developed from this type of information. One of our greatest frustrations as a company is the lack of acceptance by many sectors of the industry in today’s technological age to accept anything that cannot be scientifically computed. Having said that, we, as a company, are striving to produce the necessary scientific evidence that will justify our claims.

there is still a great deal about livestock production that has not been scientifically diagnosed, but rather handed down through generations of stockmen...

Adding to our frustrations is the unwillingness of scientists to accept that there is more than one place from where research can evolve. This has forced us to start doing our own research and then we are faced with the claims that it wasn’t done by a scientist so it cannot be validated. It is the classic catch 22 situation. We have always presented to the scientific community with a willingness to share information and work together for the betterment of the livestock industry. We cannot but be dismayed at the seemingly endless amount of resources that the scientific community use to protect their own environment at the expense of community/industry cooperation and advancement.

We believe and this has also been backed up by scientists that there are probably between 35 and 40 genes that effect tenderness in animals with about 5 – 7 major genes. At present science has identified 2 or maybe three of these. During discussions with a scientist at the forefront of this research on tenderness where our system was being explained, this scientist accepted that our system probably identifies the other major genes responsible for tenderness. It is not surprising that there are a number of genes that determine tenderness and we are sure that the same applies to most animal’s traits. This is the reason that we place so much importance on the balance between traits in animals in the CLMS system.

We have seen the emphasis being placed on breeding for high daily weight gain in cattle over the last 20 years or so. This has led to larger, faster growing animals, but what has happened to things like meat yield and feed conversion rates. There has also been a significant increase in the number of cows that look more like males than females and this affects things like calving ease and percentages and milk quality.

Similarly, in the dairy industry the trend has been to produce more milk per cow and what has happened? Instead of cows producing consistently for 12 – 15 lactations, their udders are collapsing after 4 – 5 lactations of high production. Is it worth the cost involved in breeding all the extra replacements or producing lower quality milk?

These are just obvious examples of what breeding for just one or two selected traits can do.

What extent does it affect our human health when the genetic balance of animals is manipulated?

One of the questions that science hasn’t satisfactorily answered yet is to what extent does it affect our human health when the genetic balance of animals is manipulated for short term or monetary gain?

You only need to become aware of all the dietary fads and food experts making millions out of our current health status to know that something is changing with our food. Compare the number of children today with disabilities such as autism and the number with behavioural issues or have been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or Attention Deficit Disorder or similar and compare today’s percentages with those of 30 years ago. We know that some food additives affect children’s health and so we need to ask what affect the way we raise our livestock affects the people who eat meat or drink milk that has been exposed to chemical sprays, hormone growth implants and many food additives.

Having said that we do recognise that there is a place for the use of some of the artificial production aids that are available for today’s producers and used with care and following the manufacturer’s instructions can provide significant benefits to the industry. Unfortunately, some of these aids are promoted as a cheaper alternative to the old ways and this is not always the case. We encourage producers to use the tools that nature has provided as the first choice in growing their enterprises.

These are the issues that we as a company are addressing. We have every confidence in the industry’s future. However, we recognise the importance of balance in all that we do and there is evidence available for any one perceptive enough to look for it that shows that the trend is towards imbalance rather than balance in the livestock industry today.

Over the last 10 years, members of our company have spent many hours developing this system. Most of the research we have done, through the very nature of what we are establishing, has meant a practical, hands on approach. We have evaluated hundreds of animals and then sampled the meat to evaluate the relationship between the scoring system and meat quality. The system that has been developed is certainly between 98% and 100% accurate based on taste tests.

We have done a couple of scientifically based trials. One was conducted by the Rutherglen Research Institute and involved the use of a Warner Bratzeler Shear Force test on some 16 samples of meat that we sent them for analysis. The following table shows the results.

Body No. Fresh Weight (Kg) WB. AV. Shear Test. CLMS Live Grade.
111 199.8 4.40 3
137 253 4.96 3
141 234.7 5.71 4
143 231.9 6.40 4
210 181 3.01 3
214 190.7 4.57 4
219 185.1 4.59 4
233 159.8 4.44 3
234 272.8 3.00 2
239 201.9 3.25 3
246 214.9 7.01 5
251 205.2 2.49 2
253 263.7 7.49 5
255 280.7 4.94 4
269 274.7 3.99 3
271 214.8 3.48 3
AVERAGE - 4.299 3.44


Grade No. tested WB tested Total Average
1 0 0 0 0
2 2 2.49
5.49 2.74
3 7 4.40
27.53 3.93
4 5 5.71
26.01 5.20
5 2 7.01
14.50 7.25

The company have also carried out some DNA tests of cattle hair to see if there is any correlation between cattle that had been tested as producers of A2 milk and our system for determining meat tenderness. These tests were carried out by a company called Agri Quality in New Zealand.

DNA Trial Comparing A2 Cows for Tenderness
125 3 A2
138 2 A2
503 4 A1
1769 4 A1/2
42 3 A2
356 3 A2
200 3 A2
9429 5 A1
9423 5 A1/2
9430 5 A1
394 5 A1
9431 3 A2
9419 3 A2
9409 5 A1
9415 5 A1/2
9425 5 A1
9385 3 A2
9443 3 A2
9387 5 A1
32 3 A2
344 3 A2
356 3 A2
42 3 A2
47 3 A2
503 4 A1
529 3 A2
59 3 A2
69 3 A2
87 3 A2
100 3 A2
105 3 A2
117 3 A2
124 3 A2
125 3 A2
133 3 A2
138 2 A2
139 3 A2
1673 3 A2
1769 4 A1
200 3 A2
250 3 A2
2570 3 A2
2587 3 A2
262 3 A2
274 3 A2
279 3 A2
287 3 A2
2925 3 A2
293 3 A2

This result shows all but three cattle graded at 3 or 2 for tenderness as being A2 milk producers. All the cattle that were graded as tender were A2 milk producers.