Nutrition versus Genetics
What’s more important genetics or nutrition? Mississippi State University published and article that I will link at the end discussing this heated question. Wild does from 3 different regions of Mississippi were darted and put into research pens where their diet could be controlled. The 3 regions were considered good, medium and bad in relative genetics based on body size and rack score. They grew the buck fawns in same controlled environment for 2 generations. The results found that the buck size equaled out at the 2nd generation with equal nutrition independent from which region they came from.
From a management perspective it is important that in their findings not only the mother but the grandmother needed proper nutrition to equal out the size of the bucks from the 3 regions as well as the bucks. So what does all this mean to the manager. In our region in NW Ga where most of the land is used for timber production, we are similar to Thin Loess region. Our herds generally do not have access to large agricultural fields yielding unlimited supplies of high quantity feed year round. We have to take extra steps and need to burn to open the canopy and promote new growth, plant good year round food plots (white clover and chicory based is a great one for our region), and plan to supplemental feed. We prefer the all-in-one feed Antler-X-Treme. Population control is a must to create a positive carrying capacity. Also, a good understanding that it TAKES TIME to build the herd according this study 3 generations are needed.
