Sheep Industry News August 2025

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Index

Breeding Objective (Breed group)

Component traits (relative emphasis)

Increase weaning weight (4%), “milk” (9%), and number of lambs weaned (71%); restrict number of lambs born (16%) Increase weaning weight (5%), “milk” (21%), and number of lambs weaned (67%); restrict number of lambs born (7%) Increase weaning weight (14%), post-weaning weight (40%), and post-weaning loin muscle depth (40%); restrict post-weaning back fat depth (6%). Increase post-weaning weight (27%), “milk” (6%), yearling greasy fleece weight (10%), and number of lambs born (38%); reduce yearling fiber diameter (4%); restrict yearling weight (15%)

Maximize total weight of lamb weaned (maternal hair)

US Hair

Maximize total weight of lamb weaned (maternal wool)

US Maternal

Carcass Plus

Improve carcass value (terminal)

Western Range

Improve profitability (range)

Table 1. Multiple-trait selection indexes currently available in the NSIP along with the breeding objective they reflect, the breed groups they were developed for, the component traits included, and the relative emphasis (in percentage terms) they place on component traits.

Sheep Gems Continued from Page 31

genomic selection for traits already evaluated needs to be implemented, along with development of genomically enhanced EBV for novel traits of economic importance to breeders, including lamb survival and ewe longevity. If GxE proves to be important, we need to establish tools for incorporating those interactions into producers’ breeding decisions. Key to the implementation of Sheep GEMS is for producers to continue - if not expand - their recording of both novel and traditional traits. Without that, many of the advantages of incorporating genomic data into the NSIP genetic evaluation will be lost. There also is a need for tools to assist producers collect and digitize their flocks’ performance data more easily, and for web-based tools to support breeders’ selection and mating decisions. In short, there is a lot left to do. I would like to finish by returning to Tom Boyer. The value of Sheep GEMS depends on its outcomes being adopted by the U.S. sheep indus try. I asked Tom about his thoughts on this.

of GEMS. Productivity wise, they will stay where they are and have been for decades. There are, however, within the industry a select group of ‘Young Guns’ who are tired of mediocrity, and who have a passion for constant improvement, especially improvement in their profitability. These folks include a powerful set of young educators, extension, and sheep specialists, and early adopter producers who will embrace GEMS and take the industry forward with a quantum leap. I salute this group!”

I would also like to salute and thank everyone participating in Sheep GEMS. Its success is because of you.

Acknowledgements. We thank U.S. sheep associations and breed organizations, NSIP, and sheep producers, for their contributions to this research. This work is supported by the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grant (grant no. 2022-67015-36073/project accession no. 1027785) from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. The USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the USDA.

Boyer replied, “I see many within the industry who will think it is too hard, too expensive, too ‘some other reason’ not to adopt the outcomes

August 2025 • Sheep Industry News • 35