Post by: predatorG on November 02, 2018, 12:34:00 PM
BUT
Assuming that a big buck travels a lot and gets to breed a decent number of does, 50% of his offspring that year should hypothetically be does. These does still have the same Dad, so even though they can’t grow antlers they still have the same big buck genes in them right? Obviously you can’t track these does realistically but wouldn’t it be safe to say that their future kids have a higher likely hood of being big bucks even without a dominant father? I think it would be interesting to look at does with big buck genes to see what their offspring are like. Obviously this post isn’t really conjecture and more of an observation on how nature works, but it was an interesting realization. Also then, how diverse is a given deer population genetically?
Post by: cavemann on November 02, 2018, 12:57:30 PM
I want more deer/elk regardless of antler size to keep more opportunities period, not necessarily the biggest bucks/bulls that may or may not breed while they spend late years holed up and not breeding.
Post by: frazierw on November 02, 2018, 01:00:52 PM
Everyone always talks about big bucks breeding and being able to pass on their genetics, which means if you miss one early season and get him or miss him again late he’s been able to procreate and there will hopefully be a couple bucks born that will grow up to be huge and just like him. I saw this last year in Montana when I shot a different buck than I was going after because he had the same antler style as a masher we saw, but 25 inches less bone or more due to regression. Everyone knows that big bucks should make more big bucks.
BUT
Assuming that a big buck travels a lot and gets to breed a decent number of does, 50% of his offspring that year should hypothetically be does. These does still have the same Dad, so even though they can’t grow antlers they still have the same big buck genes in them right? Obviously you can’t track these does realistically but wouldn’t it be safe to say that their future kids have a higher likely hood of being big bucks even without a dominant father? I think it would be interesting to look at does with big buck genes to see what their offspring are like. Obviously this post isn’t really conjecture and more of an observation on how nature works, but it was an interesting realization. Also then, how diverse is a given deer population genetically?
I have a buddy that has his PHD in Wildlife ecology and I asked him basically the same question, and he wasnt able to find any studies that were done on the subject, but it is a great question!
Post by: huntnphool on November 02, 2018, 01:01:46 PM
Genes don't change as the buck gets older, it doesn't matter when he spreads them. :twocents:
Post by: elkrack on November 02, 2018, 01:03:48 PM
Keep in mind that a buck with a big rack doesn't wait until then to breed, chances are he has been spreading his genes for years leading up to that point.
Genes don't change as the buck gets older, it doesn't matter when he spreads them. :twocents:
:yeah:
Post by: hunter399 on November 02, 2018, 01:13:38 PM
I'll answer with my own opinion and serious questions.. Why do we assume large antlers means good genes? The genes we should want is ability to survive winter, predators and habitat not necessarily antlers.. Is it an assumed fact that large antlers means good genetics or just the ability to grow large antlers?
I want more deer/elk regardless of antler size to keep more opportunities period, not necessarily the biggest bucks/bulls that may or may not breed while they spend late years holed up and not breeding.
I will just throw this out there .
If a buck has a nice set of antlers
That buck has survived
A few hard winters
A few predators,including hunting seasons
Has made a nice set of antlers, With genetics and habitat.
So yes you do want the best genetics to be passed along but doesn't always workout that way.But like you put you want more deer and elk regardless of antler size.Than you also want animals with the biggest racks to spread there seed.
Post by: Samloffler on November 02, 2018, 01:16:03 PM
All that being said, the whitetail population I hunt totaly has two antler forms. One is thick with super long eye guards, and one is narrow, spindly, and "normal" looking. Maybe back in the day there were only two dominant bucks in the area but they never ran into eachother.
Its an interesting conversation.
Post by: tlbradford on November 02, 2018, 01:25:32 PM
I'll answer with my own opinion and serious questions.. Why do we assume large antlers means good genes? The genes we should want is ability to survive winter, predators and habitat not necessarily antlers.. Is it an assumed fact that large antlers means good genetics or just the ability to grow large antlers?
I want more deer/elk regardless of antler size to keep more opportunities period, not necessarily the biggest bucks/bulls that may or may not breed while they spend late years holed up and not breeding.
It might not mean it is the best genes, but it will indicate good nutrition and health typically
Post by: predatorG on November 02, 2018, 01:27:20 PM
I'll answer with my own opinion and serious questions.. Why do we assume large antlers means good genes? The genes we should want is ability to survive winter, predators and habitat not necessarily antlers.. Is it an assumed fact that large antlers means good genetics or just the ability to grow large antlers?
I want more deer/elk regardless of antler size to keep more opportunities period, not necessarily the biggest bucks/bulls that may or may not breed while they spend late years holed up and not breeding.
Sorry, I always forget the importance of surviving winters. I hunt the puget sound lowlands where food is relatively plentiful year round and snow is sparse. For us the predators are the biggest threat, and genes don’t seem to help that much for fawns in that case :dunno:
I always forget that there’s more important genes in other places than antler size, which is what I always focus on here with Blacktails.
Post by: fishnfur on November 02, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
The answer is too convoluted for a sensible discussion. I hesitate to get deeply into it because it has been too many years since I studied any genetics. Also, discussions about dominant traits and recessive traits require that you know what the trait for growing large antlers is. I would suspect dominant.
Educators always simplify these discussions by discussing simple traits to track, such as eye color. A parent can carry pure traits or mixed traits, depending on what their parents traits were. Brown - Dominant trait. Blue - Recessive trait. Mating a pure blue eyed trait human and a pure brown eyed trait human produces only brown eyed children, because the brown trait is dominant. The same pairing of say a parent (or both parents) that have the traits for both brown and blue eyes (regardless of their actual eye color) will produce a predictable mix of both brown and blue eyed children.
So that's all way too boring and confusing. One thing to remember is that this buck that we consider dominant likely has a whole set of siblings of different fathers adding their similar genes to the population. Also, we don't know what the genetics of this dominant buck's parents were. He may carry mixed traits for both large and small antlered kids. One of the most confusing aspects is that when gamete sex cells divide to become either eggs or sperm, they only receive half of the original number of chromosomes. When sperm and egg combine in the mother, the correct number of chromosomes is restored, containing the traits of both parents. No two sperm or eggs are alike. Depending on which sperm won the race, and which egg was available and got fertilized, you end up with innumerable chances for minor differences in the results of the offspring. Other considerations:
- one good study I found regarding antler size indicated that a warm wet spring was the most important factor in a deer reaching it's genetic potential for growing antlers. Warm and wet equaled more food during the antler growing season.
- Large antlers give a buck at better chance at spreading their genes, given a population of same body sized animals. A massive bodied fork horn deer will outcompete a young 10 point buck when it is time to mate. The doe doesn't decide which will breed her. If necessary, they'll fight for it. The big bodied deer will win.
- the trait for super large antlers may be passed along for many generations before it is expressed in an offspring. That big old dominant buck that bred all those does will have his genes passed down for a long time. Every once in awhile, his look-alike comes along many generations removed from his life.
Ultimately, there are so many ramifications in a moving deer population that we cannot guess much about what will happen in the future. Additionally, since does tend to say local to their maternal herd, and bucks move on to a new area at around age 1.5, there is always an influx of new genes into each population of deer. (not so much so on the islands).
Confused? Good! :chuckle:
Here's that other thread I spoke of regarding antler size and genetics: https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,193863.msg2568654.html#msg2568654
Post by: Igor on November 02, 2018, 04:45:21 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 02, 2018, 04:50:32 PM
It seems like every so often the subject of a buck "regressing" comes up........one which had large antlers at one time, but no longer does. Without seeing the same buck year-after-year, I'm not sure how it's known whether a buck has "regressed" or not. I've seen bucks that just look old, but don't have large antlers. My son shot a very large-bodied 2 pt. mulie with five eye-guards this season, and his face just looks like an old deer, not a young one. I guess my question is how common is it for a large buck to actually regress?
Pics?
Post by: Igor on November 02, 2018, 05:45:21 PM
It seems like every so often the subject of a buck "regressing" comes up........one which had large antlers at one time, but no longer does. Without seeing the same buck year-after-year, I'm not sure how it's known whether a buck has "regressed" or not. I've seen bucks that just look old, but don't have large antlers. My son shot a very large-bodied 2 pt. mulie with five eye-guards this season, and his face just looks like an old deer, not a young one. I guess my question is how common is it for a large buck to actually regress?
Pics?
(https://i.imgur.com/YQIj8oYh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/hrgytyph.jpg?1)
Post by: Bango skank on November 02, 2018, 06:15:38 PM
How do we know the "big antler gene" isn't a male only chromosome? His female offspring may not even have the ability to have the gene. Even if they do, by the time that generation comes around, its at most a 50% chance its been passed down.
All that being said, the whitetail population I hunt totaly has two antler forms. One is thick with super long eye guards, and one is narrow, spindly, and "normal" looking. Maybe back in the day there were only two dominant bucks in the area but they never ran into eachother.
Its an interesting conversation.
Whitetail bucks disperse from their home range at about 1.5 yrs or earlier. So the bucks born in your hunting area wont live there after momma boots them. So its not generations of bucks living and growing there alongside pops and grandpa.
Post by: Bango skank on November 02, 2018, 06:19:27 PM
I guess my question is how common is it for a large buck to actually regress?
They all will, but they have to live long enough, so its not common. This buck ive been watching since 2015. These side by side pics are 2017 / 2018. Hes got some new junk and gained a little mass, but hes lost a good deal of tine length. Not hunting him this year, so im hoping hes still alive next year, will be interesting to see what happens with his rack. I think this year is the start of his downhill side.
Post by: jackelope on November 02, 2018, 06:36:51 PM
It seems like every so often the subject of a buck "regressing" comes up........one which had large antlers at one time, but no longer does. Without seeing the same buck year-after-year, I'm not sure how it's known whether a buck has "regressed" or not. I've seen bucks that just look old, but don't have large antlers. My son shot a very large-bodied 2 pt. mulie with five eye-guards this season, and his face just looks like an old deer, not a young one. I guess my question is how common is it for a large buck to actually regress?
Pics?
(https://i.imgur.com/YQIj8oYh.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/hrgytyph.jpg?1)
I’ll give this a shot. I don’t think that buck is a “regressed” buck. He doesn’t look like he has enough mass to truly be an old regressed buck that had a more impressive rack of antlers. Not to say he’s not an old 2 point but I think that’s probably what he is. An old buck that’s always been a 2 point. The left side that looks a little bladed might be throwing me off a little.
Post by: fishnfur on November 02, 2018, 11:29:04 PM
SkagitSteel' buck this year has the classic appearance of a buck well into regression. I think he states that deer start to regress around age 10, and felt this one was older than that. I was thinking it was more like eight when deer start to regress, but I'm not going to argue with him on that. It's just a number. I'm sure every deer is different.
Anyways, (though I have no first hand knowledge) the classic regressive rack displays massive bases and main beam which continue to gain girth even during regression. Also, they typically have very impressive knurling at the bases. Finally, the tine length is drastically reduced and often appear a bit stunted/twisted/bent, and narrow quickly from the base of the main beam out to the point of the tine. An inch or two tine length seems common in the photos I've seen in the past. For a quick review, here is skagitsteel's thread with pics: https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,232678.0.html
So to answer the question, how do you know if he is regressive (?), in the absence of photos or old similar identifiable sheds collected from the area where the buck was harvested, it is really just a judgement call that is also based on the width and amount of white of the muzzle, overall body size, etc. If he was over 10 years old, he will likely have a massive head, large body (though that might be possibly waning as well), and shorter tines with massive bases. A less gifted buck in the antler department would be smaller in antler comparison but still have the other old buck features.
Edit: Ridgefire's Halloween Buck posted a couple days ago is one to make you scratch your head. The tines appear like that of a regressive buck, he has pretty good knurling, not massive, but pretty good. His muzzle appears white and wide from what we can see. The bases and main beams are not massive - they are pretty average. Just guessing, I'd say he was probably four years old and would likely never be a spectacular buck (though I'd love to have killed him - he's a great buck in my book). It wouldn't totally surprise me if Ridgefire posted a picture of him from two years ago showing him with longer more impressive tines and even smaller main beams and bases, indicating that he was indeed regressing. Then again, he could be a two year old that was just beginning to show his potential. Ya just never know... ( I guess you could always have a tooth aged).