Sunday 19 December 2021

Who's better: Taurus cattle or Tauros cattle?

Sometimes, Taurus and Tauros cattle get confused. This is not surprising, considering that their name is almost identical. But I think it is important to differentiate between both breeds, because of their different history and also different quality as a “breeding-back” result. This post is going to examinate which breed has so far been more successful in approximating the goal of “breeding-back”.  

 

Some may say it is unfair to compare the two breeds because Taurus cattle were created in 1997 while the TaurOs Project started in 2009. However, I am only comparing individuals of the same crossbreed generation in order to be make it comparable. The youngest Tauros cattle may be of the fourth or fifth generation, the youngest adult ones (only adult cattle can be compared as the traits are not full expressed in juvenile and subadult individuals) may be of the second and third generation. Therefore, I will compare only animals of the first, second and third crossbreed generation of both projects. 

I compare them based on the animals that are available to me. The largest Tauros cattle herd is in Keent, Netherlands, but that herd is not very present on the web, only single individuals. The Kettingdijk herd has been documented very well by Geer vanne Smeed (go here for the flickR stream) and there are also many photos and videos of the Milovice herd in the Czech Republic. For a collection of recent photos of several Tauros cattle go here. Regarding Taurus cattle, I only use the Lippeaue and Hortobagyi herds for comparison, because they can be considered the only “true” Taurus cattle herds in the strict sense. Most of the other herds are basically Heck cattle herds that included single Taurus individuals, sometimes as sires (f.e. the Schmidtenhöhe herd, the Cuxhavener Küstenheiden herd). There is a continuum between Heck and Taurus cattle. I only use the “source” of Taurus cattle, Lippeaue and Hortobagyi, for the comparison. Taurus cattle are often labelled as “improved Heck cattle”, but considering that in the Lippeaue there was little to no backcrossing with Heck but they relied heavily on backcrossing with Sayaguesa, and that the portion of Sayaguesa makes up to 50% of the genetic composition of the animals there, the Taurus cattle in the Lippeaue are actually more “improved Sayaguesa” than “improved Heck cattle”. In Hortobagyi, the situation is more diverse as they have more herds and more breeds. 

 

Size 

 

Several Taurus cattle individuals have been measured. The Sayaguesa x Heck bull Lucio was between 160 and 165 cm tall at the withers, the Sayaguesa x (Heck x Chianina) bull “Laokoon’s brother” is about 172 cm tall at the withers. Three cows have been measured, and they ranged between 153 and 155 cm at the withers. Considering that they use Sayaguesa, which can reach up to 170 cm at the withers and Chianina, which even surpass that height, the size of Taurus cattle is what is to be expected. 

For Tauros cattle, no measurements have been published so far. But based on the photos and videos available on the web, they cannot be very large. I saw a video that is not online anymore of the Maremmana x Pajuna bull Manolo Uno and he was only insignificantly taller than the Highland crossbreeds (and Highland is a rather small breed). There is also a photo of the Maashorst bull (probably of the same breed combination) which I cannot find anymore that shows it next to a person, and it did not look large either. If Tauros cattle are not that large (not reaching 160 cm, the lower limit of European aurochs bulls), I would not be surprised considering that many of their founding breeds (Pajuna, Highland, Maronesa) are not large. For the size, the Tauros Programme relies on Maremmana, which also may reach 170 cm at least occasionally, but their Maremmana bull at Keent was not that large, it was about the size as the Pajuna bull. We simply need measurements from at least a few bulls to get an idea of Tauros cattle. 

 

Colour 

 

Taurus cattle mostly have the right colour with no domestic colour mutations, except for the recessive dilution allele(s) contributed by Chianina that cause a diluted coat colour in some individuals. Considering that most of the Taurus cattle at the Lippeaue are part Chianina, the allele(s) might be widespread in the population. Small white spots occur rarely in the Lippeaue, and in some Holstein-influenced individuals in Hortobagyi. 

Tauros cattle show a wider variation spectrum than Taurus cattle concerning colour. The populations have the recessive dilution allele contributed by Maremmana and Tudanca that removes the red pigment in the coat, and also Simmental dilution contributed by Highland. Several individuals also have the dominant brindle allele, contributed by Highland. White spots seem to be a little bit more common than in Taurus cattle. 

 

Sexual dichromatism 

 

I did a post on the sexual dichromatism found in the Lippeaue for the year 2015. It occurs that more than 80% of the individuals display the right colour for their sex. It is, of course, possible that some black bulls inherit black cows and that some cow-coloured cows inherit bulls with a saddle. But all in all, I think the sexual dichromatism in the Lippeaue is rather good. The dichromatism in Hortobagyi is slightly less good, as dark cows are more common there than in the Lippeaue. 

The sexual dichromatism in Tauros cattle is less clear. Bulls with a saddle are not a rare sight, as well as pretty dark cows. 

 

Morphology

 

The morphology of Taurus cattle is variable. Most individuals are long-legged, but also have a trunk that is longer than in the aurochs (a problem found in most taurine cattle). Most individuals have a comparably long snout, although probably not to the same extent as in the aurochs. A hump is always present. Some individuals are more massive than others, but the body morphology of single individuals such as Lamarck or Lisette is quite good. 

Tauros cattle are even more variable concerning body morphology, skull morphology and proportions. Especially the Highland influenced individuals can be rather short-legged and massive (go here). Some bulls resemble Heck cattle in build. Some individuals are comparable to Taurus cattle regarding morphology. What is nice is that some Tauros cattle bulls have rather large humps, but there are also those with a small hump. The skull length varies greatly, some individuals have the same skull shape as Taurus cattle, others can be rather short-faced. 

 

Horn size 

 

The horn size of Taurus cattle is variable. Some individuals in the Lippeaue, such as the bull Lamarck, can have horns that are within the variation range we find in the European aurochs, others have smaller horns than what is average for the European aurochs. Some individuals in the Lippeaue have horns only slightly larger than in Chianina. In Hortobagyi, the average horn volume of Taurus cattle is larger due to the influence of Watussi and Grey cattle. The horn dimensions match those of the European aurochs quite often in Hortobagyi. 

Tauros cattle are variable regarding horn size as well. Some individuals can be small-horned too, but on average the horn size in Taurus cattle is larger than in the Lippeaue Taurus cattle, but not larger than in the Hortobagyi Taurus cattle. 

 

Horn curvature 

 

The horn curvature of Taurus cattle is variable, but the horns always face forwards in an aurochs-like angle (the angle should be between 50 and 80°). Some individuals, like Lamarck, Lerida, Loxia and Lisette, have inwards-facing horn tips, sometimes to the same extent as in the aurochs. Other individuals may have outwards-facing horn tips, particularly the cows. 

The horn curvature of Tauros cattle is variable as well, more so than in Taurus cattle. The horns of many bulls do not curve inwards, and several cows have lyre-like horn shapes due to influence from Maremmana and Highland. In some bulls, probably the Maronesa-influenced ones, the horn tips face inwards. The horns of some bulls face forwards in an aurochs-like manner, others have too upright horns. Some bulls have horns very reminiscent of those of some Heck or Cachena bulls (go here, for example). 

 

All in all, I think that it would be most fair to conclude that Tauros cattle are somewhere between Heck cattle and Taurus cattle in quality as a “breeding-back” result. Taurus cattle are larger, the horn shape matches the aurochs more often than in Tauros cattle, their sexual dichromatism is clearer, and the Taurus cattle population does not include extremely short-legged chubby individuals that are found in the Tauros cattle population, at least not to the extent found in the Highland crossbreeds. Tauros cattle seem to be more variable on each aspect than Taurus cattle. 

So far, Tauros cattle have not reached the quality of Taurus cattle. In order to catch up, the TaurOs Project would need strict selection. Some individuals certainly have potential, that is undoubtedly the case. But based on what the herds currently look like (f.e. their inhomogeneous colours and morphologies), as much as the fact that they have several bulls per herd instead of one quality sire, I wonder if they select their animals at all. Perhaps their plan was simply to crossbreed a number of breeds and then let them breed for themselves rather than strategic selective breeding over several years or decades. 


7 comments:

  1. A recent review article on the tarpan and konik horse gives politics and romanticism in part as reasons for the misguided perceptions of these horses.
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989421004613
    How much do politics and romanticism also influence the breeding back of aurochs? Are the Tauros, Taurus, Uruz or Auerrind projects any better than each other as their ultimate goal is the same? Do they liaise with each other? If the cloning of the mammoth to create a mammoth/ elephant hybrid is a success, might the same technique be used for the aurochs and would the result be deemed better than the results from any of the breeding-back projects above?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for linking that article, I didn't know it previously.
      Concerning your first question: I don't think that politics and romanticism play a role in "breeding-back" the aurochs. Concerning your second question: Yes, the projects differ in quality, that's the topic of my article. Taurus cattle are better than Tauros cattle so far, but it's too early compare the Auerrind project yet and the Uruz Project does not exist. Concering the third question: The projects announced they are going to cooperate in some way, but apart from the fact that the Auerrind project was sent some Tauros cattle cows, not currently. At least not that I know of. Concerning your fourth question: That's certainly feasable and would probably even less effortful than in the case of the mammoth. The result of inserting aurochs alleles into a cattle genome using genome editing would certainly be "better" than the results of any "breeding-back" project. The big question is, however, if this will ever happen.

      Delete
  2. My experience with breeding domestic fish (Guppies - Poecilia reticulata) and observations of dog breeding suggest that when multiple domestic varieties are bred together over many generations, these domestic animals revert back to a "wild type" - at least morphologically and probably to some extent behaviourally as well. This is likely to happen with the cattle as well - given enough generations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. I think allowing a diversity of animals breed is the long approach but the best one. This is because it'll allow for genetic diversity and invisible traits we can not optically select for to remain in the genetic pool.
      Having a low number of sires will lead to massive hereditary health problems like those that are apparent in the majority of pure bred horses, dogs and cats breeds.
      Breeding back shouldn't be a race about who achieves certain looks first. We need to be able to guarantee genetically healthy animals and avoid breeding bottlenecks if we are to keep a breeding back population viable in the long term.
      Sure, by all means catch away the most obviously inappropriate/derived genetic traits but then let the animals battle out the rest of the genetic fitness wars.
      Except for some more recent mutations the Aurochs had all the genes that are floating around in domestic breeds in its genome. Those genes should be able to coexist in a breeding back population again.
      It's probably that genetic diversity that enabled the Aurochs to conquer all of Eurasia and (northern?) Africa in pre-historic times.

      Delete
    2. Surely genetic diversity is important, but we should not overestimate its role for the survival of the population. A lot of feral cattle populations are rather inbred, descending from only a small number of founding animals. But of course, taking a number of very aurochs-like breeds, letting them breed for themselves and only cull the very domestic-looking ones is sufficient to fill the ecologic niche of the aurochs more or less authentically. (I do not think, however, that this is what the TaurOs Project is doing).

      Delete
  3. There are two forms of selection in breeding.
    1) Breeding with an elite father/bull making the inbreeding large after a few generations.
    2) Letting many animals breed to get large genetic diversity and only culling animals with worst phenotypes (or behavior).

    1) is fast, but can give inbreeding problems later.
    2) is slower but reduce the risk of inbreeding defects.

    Niklas
    Sweden

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Behaviour is part of the phenotype.
      So far, there is no evidence that the Tauros Program culls animals. We should also not assume that strict selective breeding automatically leads to inbreeding problems. Heck cattle for example have had several genetic bottlenecks, but no inbreeding problems occured yet in the entire population.

      Delete