SELECTION FOR IMPROVED FEED EFFICIENCY: A GENOMICS APPROACH. Matt Spangler, Ph.D. University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Similar documents
Importance of Feed Efficiency

Overview. 50,000 Markers on a Chip. Definitions. Problem: Whole Genome Selection Project Involving 2,000 Industry A.I. Sires

Proceedings, The Range Beef Cow Symposium XXII Nov. 29, 30 and Dec. 1, 2011, Mitchell, NE. IMPLEMENTATION OF MARKER ASSISTED EPDs

USING GENOMICS TO AFFECT COW HERD REPRODUCTION. Matt Spangler University of Nebraska-Lincoln

EFFICIENCY OF THE COW HERD: BULL SELECTION AND GENETICS

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D. Cooperative Extension Specialist

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Goal Oriented Use of Genetic Prediction

Understanding and Utilizing EPDs to Select Bulls

GENETIC IMPROVEMENT FOR FORAGE USE GENETIC IMPROVEMENT PRINCIPLES FOR THE COWHERD 1/2/2014. Qualifications. Matt Spangler University of Nebraska

Ma# Spangler Sept. 8, 2016

What s new in beef cattle genetics

Using EPDs in a Commercial Herd

Beef cattle genetic evaluation in Australia ~ BREEDPLAN. Robert Banks AGBU

ebeef was developed as part of USDA NIFA grants # # # Animal Genomics and Biotechnology Education

Beef Sire Selection for Cattle Genetic Improvement Program (Updated February 19, 2014)

MOOTOPIA: AN ANIMAL BREEDERS WISH LIST FOR THE BEEF INDUSTRY. Matt Spangler University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Genetics of Beef Cattle: Moving to the genomics era Matt Spangler, Assistant Professor, Animal Science, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Using Genomics to Affect Cow Herd Reproduction

EPD Info 1/5. Guide to the American Gelbvieh Association Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs)

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Effective Use Of EPDs. Presented to: Minnesota Beef Producers Presented by: Kris A. Ringwall, Ph. D. NDSU Extension Beef Specialist

The Power of Economic Selection Indices to Make Genetic Change in Pro;itability

Beef - Horse - Poultry - Sheep - Swine. August 2016

Canadian Hereford Association

Genomic Prediction in Hereford Cattle

The genomics avalanche Let s visit the past

COW CALF BREEDING AND GENETICS. Dhuyvetter

2015 Producer Survey Results

TECHNICAL BULLETIN December 2017

11/30/11. Lb output/beef cow. Corn Yields. Corn and Wheat

Genetic variance and covariance and breed differences for feed intake and average daily gain to improve feed efficiency in growing cattle

Traits and Tools for Retention and Replacement of Females

Genome selection: Basics and experience in animal systems. Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Robert S. Wells, Ph.D., PAS Livestock Consultant

Selecting the Right Genetics (Matching Cows to your Environment) David W. Schafer Arizona Beef Day July 29, 2009

Creating Premium Beef Maximizing Dairy Profit

TECHNICAL SUMMARY April 2010

Genomics. NBCEC Mission. Change in AHA PredicCve Accuracy. Current 50k Sample Numbers. Dorian Garrick Emerging Technologies Commi5ee Breakout 06/14/13

OLSEN RANCHES, INC. N359. Art Olsen Douglas Olsen

B eef Cattle Management Update

Impact of Selection for Improved Feed Efficiency. Phillip Lancaster UF/IFAS Range Cattle Research and Education Center

Using Live Animal Carcass Ultrasound Information in Beef Cattle Selection

DNA Technologies and Production Markers

2/12/13% 20 investigators 10 institutions

Breeding Objectives Indicate Value of Genomics for Beef Cattle M. D. MacNeil, Delta G

Management Decisions. Management Decisions. Tradition. Legacy. ReproGene /3/2018. Jared Decker, University of Missouri 1

Developing Accurate Parentage Markers for Cattle: From BSE Traceback to 50k SNP Chips. Gary Bennett

Selecting and Sourcing Replacement Heifers

Choices in Breeding Programs to Fit Your Environment

OLSEN RANCHES, INC. Art Olsen Douglas Olsen

Pregnancies for Profit. Beef x Dairy Sires

REDUCED SNP PANELS creation, realistic expectations, and use in different livestock industries

Understanding Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) Scott P. Greiner, Extension Animal Scientist, Virginia Tech

MARK GARDINER. GARDINER ANGUS RANCH Ashland, Kansas U.S.A.

Effects of Concurrent Selection for Residual Feed Intake and Average Daily Gain on Fertility and Longevity in Black Angus Beef Females

Uses of DNA information on Commercial Cattle Ranches. Alison Van Eenennaam

Selecting the Right Replacement. Robert S. Wells, Ph.D., PAS Livestock Consultant

USING PERFORMANCE TECHNOLOGIES. Matt Woolfolk ASA Annual Meeting Educational Forum December 1, 2018

Crossbreeding-One of the Tools to Increase Profitability

Proceedings, The Range Beef Cow Symposium XXI December 1, 2 and 3, 2009, Casper, WY USING INFORMATION TO MAKE INFORMED SELECTION DECISIONS

OLSEN RANCHES, INC. L574. Art Olsen Douglas Olsen

Got Milk? An Economic Look at Cow Size and Milk. July 13 th, 2015

Crossbreeding-One of the Tools to Increase Profitability

CHOOSING A BREEDING BULL

Delivering Valued Genomic Products to Livestock Customers

. Alison Van Eenennaam Animal Genomics and Biotechnology Cooperative Extension Specialist

Genetic Evaluations. Stephen Scott Canadian Hereford Association

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

SNP production markers and how genomic technologies will influence breeding decisions. Elisa Marques, PhD GeneSeek, a Neogen Company

TECHNICAL BULLETIN GENEMAX ADVANTAGE IS DESIGNED FOR COMMERCIAL BEEF HERDS. August Zoetis Genetics 333 Portage Street Kalamazoo, MI

TECHNICAL BULLETIN GENEMAX ADVANTAGE IS DESIGNED FOR COMMERCIAL BEEF HERDS. August Zoetis Genetics 333 Portage Street Kalamazoo, MI

The economics of using DNA markers for bull selection in the beef seedstock sector A.L. Van Eenennaam 1, J.H. van der Werf 2, M.E.

The Importance of Information Management and Genomics

Breed effects and genetic parameter estimates for calving difficulty and birth weight in a multibreed population 1

Local Genetic Adaptation in Beef Cattle Jared Decker Assistant Professor Beef Genetics Specialist Computational Genomics

ECONOMICALLY RELEVANT TRAITS AND SELECTION INDICES

Development and implementation of genomic methods in beef cattle genetic improvement in Australia. Rob Banks (AGBU) Alex McDonald (ABRI)

The promise of genomics for animal improvement. Daniela Lourenco

FACTORS INFLUENCING PROFITABILITY OF FEEDLOT STEERS

IMPROVING EPD ACCURACY BY COMBINING EPD INFORMATION WITH DNA TEST RESULTS 1. Alison L. Van Eenennaam

Utilization of Molecular Information to Date. Methods of Reporting (past and present)

Indiana Beef Evaluation and Economics Feeding Program

COW HERD REPLACEMENT. John Dhuyvetter NCREC NDSU Extension

Indiana Beef Evaluation and Economics Feeding Program

Understanding EPDs and Accuracies

Traditional genetic selection for fertility: Indicator traits and potential antagonisms

Producer Uptake: How might genomic information be translated to industry outcomes? Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Welcome to Igenity Brangus and the Power of Confident Selection

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

ECONOMICS OF USING DNA MARKERS FOR SORTING FEEDLOT CATTLE Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

2013 TJSSA State Futurity Junior Cattleman s Quiz

IMPROVING YOUR BOTTOM LINE.

Optimizing Traditional and Marker Assisted Evaluation in Beef Cattle

Value-Based Marketing for Feeder Cattle. By Tom Brink, Top Dollar Angus, Inc.

technical bulletin Enhancements to Angus BREEDPLAN December 2017 Calculation of EBVs for North American Animals

Indiana Beef Evaluation and Economics Feeding Program

How might DNA-based information generate value in the beef cattle sector?

Predicting Profit. The Rancher s Guide to EPDs

Transcription:

SELECTION FOR IMPROVED FEED EFFICIENCY: A GENOMICS APPROACH Matt Spangler, Ph.D. University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Where We Rank (F:G) 2:1 1:1 6:1 3:1

Fundamental Principles P = G + E Feed Intake = Expected Intake + Residual Intake Profit = Revenue - Expense Efficiency = Output/Input or visa versa Inherent multiple-trait selection

WW Selection Success 4 Mean WW EPD 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Across Breed EPD Genetic Trends-WEANING WEIGHT All Breeds Presented on ANGUS EPD Base 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 AN AR HH CH GV LM MA SM Weaber and Fennewald, 2009

YW Selection Success 5 Mean YW EPD 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Across Breed EPD Genetic Trends- YEARLING WEIGHT All Breeds Presented on ANGUS EPD Base 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 AN AR HH CH GV LM MA SM Weaber and Fennewald, 2009

Adoption of Genomic Predictions AAA, with others quickly following Efficacy of this technology is not binary The adoption of this must be centered on the gain in EPD accuracy This is related to the proportion of genetic variation explained by a MBV This is equal to the squared genetic correlation

Current Angus Panels Trait Igenity (384SNP) Pfizer (50KSNP) Calving Ease Direct 0.47 0.33 Birth Weight 0.57 0.51 Weaning Weight 0.45 0.52 Yearling Weight 0.34 0.64 Dry Matter Intake 0.45 0.65 Yearling Height 0.38 0.63 Yearling Scrotal 0.35 0.65 Docility 0.29 0.60 Milk 0.24 0.32 Mature Weight 0.53 0.58 Mature Height 0.56 0.56 Carcass Weight 0.54 0.48 Carcass Marbling 0.65 0.57 Carcass Rib 0.58 0.60 Carcass Fat 0.50 0.56

Hereford-based Predictions Trait rg from NBCEC BW 0.43 WW 0.32 YW 0.30 MILK 0.22 CED 0.43 CEM 0.18 FAT 0.40 MARB 0.27 REA 0.36 SCROTAL 0.28

Integrated Information EPD (index or interim) MA- EPD MBV (correlated indicator trait)

Increased Accuracy-Benefits Mitigation of risk Faster genetic progress BV / t = r BV, EBV L Increased accuracy does not mean higher or lower EPDs! Increased information can make EPDs go up or down i σ BV

Impact on Accuracy--%GV=10%

Impact on Accuracy--%GV=40%

New Traits In the Genomic Era Healthfulness of beef Disease susceptibility Tenderness Adaptation FEED INTAKE AND EFFICIENCY The list will continue to grow INFORMATION OVERLOAD!

Measuring feed efficiency Dahlke et al (www.iowabeefcenter.org/docs_cows/ibc41.pdf)

What Role Does Genetics Play? ADG DMI RFI G:F ADG 0.26 0.56-0.15 0.31 DMI 0.40 0.66-0.60 RFI 0.52-0.92 G:F 0.27

EPD for Efficiency and Input do Exist Residual Gain Days to Finish Maternally oriented ME $W

Index Based Selection Rolfe et al. (2011)

Most Desirable Index? Phenotypic RFI Genetic RFI Economic index of DMI and GAIN Economic index of RFI and Gain

Why a Genomic Approach? The components of FE are heritable The input side is expensive to measure FI can be more expensive than HD genotypes Not feasible for routine phenotypes to enter NCE Phenotypes are still need for discovery and validation Here training is on adjusted phenotypes because no EPD exist

Types of Discovery Populations Purebreds of a Single Breed Purebreds of Multiple Breeds Crossbreds

2,000 Bull Project: Number of Sires Sampled Angus 402 Brangus 68 Hereford 317 Beefmaster 64 Simmental 253 Maine-Anjou 59 Red Angus 173 Brahman 53 Gelbvieh 136 Chiangus 47 Limousin 131 Santa Gertrudis 43 Charolais 125 Salers 42 Shorthorn 86 Braunvieh 27 Total =2026 1834 Used In Training

Why didn t we start with these traits? Phenotypes do not exist or are very sparse Discovery Target Validation

Example of Robustness--Breed Breed WW YW AN 0.36 (0.07) 0.51 (0.07) AR 0.16 (0.16) 0.08 (0.18)

Solutions SNP panel density (770K instead of 50K) Composition of the training population Statistical methodology

Summary We need to think about efficiency in terms of economic returns Index values will require both inputs (FI) and outputs (WT) along with body composition Genomics could play a large role here Not fully brought to fruition A genomics approach is robust to the definition of efficiency

Summary Phenotypes are still critical to collect Genomic information has the potential to increase accuracy Proportional to %GV Impacts inversely related to EPD accuracy Multiple trait selection is critical and could become more cumbersome Economic indexes help alleviate this Use index values that meet your breeding objective

STAY INFORMED USDA Beef Feed Efficiency Project www.beefefficiency.org National Beef Cattle Evaluation Consortium www.nbcec.org