Estimation of genetic parameters for growth traits in Brangus cattle

Similar documents
Pre-weaning growth traits of the Hereford breed in a multibreed composite beef cattle population

1999 American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting

Relationships between functional herd life and conformation traits in the South African Jersey breed

DAYS TO CALVING IN ARTIFICIALLY INSEMINATED CATTLE

Model comparisons and genetic and environmental parameter estimates of growth and the Kleiber ratio in Horro sheep

A critical analyses of cow-calf efficiency in extensive beef production systems

1 This research was conducted under cooperative agreements between USDA, ARS, Montana Agric. Exp.

Beef genetics for accelerated economic growth

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

Genetic and Environmental Parameters for Mature Weight and Other Growth Measures in Polled Hereford Cattle'

Crossbreeding in Beef Cattle

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

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

Abstract. 1. Introduction

Understanding and Using Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs)

The Effect of Selective Reporting on Estimates of Weaning Weight Parameters in Beef Cattle

Genetic Analysis of Cow Survival in the Israeli Dairy Cattle Population

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PUREBRED AND CROSSBRED BODY WEIGHTS IN MULTI-BREED LIMOUSIN WITH ANGUS POPULATIONS. Ryan A. Davis

Genetic Characterization of Criollo Cattle in Bolivia: I. Genetic Parameters for Pre and Postweaning Growth Traits

Genetics of efficient feed utilization and national cattle evaluation: a review

Estimation of Environmental Sensitivity of Genetic Merit for Milk Production Traits Using a Random Regression Model

Test-day models for South African dairy cattle for participation in international evaluations

EVALUATION OF UDDER AND TEAT CHARACTERISTICS, CALF. GROWTH, AND REPRODUCTION IN YOUNG Bos indicus Bos taurus COWS. A Thesis CODY JACK GLADNEY

The relationship between somatic cell count, milk production and six linearly scored type traits in Holstein cows

Using Live Animal Carcass Ultrasound Information in Beef Cattle Selection

Matching Cow Type to the Nutritional Environment

Development of economic selection indices for beef cattle improvement Kathleen P. Ochsner, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Breeding Programme Development of Bali Cattle at Bali Breeding Centre

Relationship of Cow Size to Nutrient Requirements and Production Management Issues 1

Use of Linear and Non-linear Growth Curves to Describe Body Weight Changes of Young Angus Bulls and Heifers

Proceedings, The Range Beef Cow Symposium XVIII December 9, 10, 11, 2003, Mitchell Nebraska

Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle

Genetic evaluation using single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor in American Angus 1

Benchmark Angus. Engineering Superior Beef

CHARACTERIZATION OF HEREFORD AND TWO-BREED ROTATIONAL CROSSES OF HEREFORD W ANGUS AND SIMMENTAL CAllLE: CALF PRODUCTION THROUGH WEANING

Improving Genetics in the Suckler Herd by Noirin McHugh & Mark McGee

BLUP and Genomic Selection

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

TECHNICAL BULLETIN December 2017

Breeding for Profit from Beef Production ( )

COW CALF BREEDING AND GENETICS. Dhuyvetter

of Nebraska - Lincoln

LIFE SCIENCE. Evaluation of Performance Trends in the Tucumcari Bull Test 1961 to 2000 BRINGING TO YOUR HOME ECONOMICS COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND

Efficiency of Different Selection Indices for Desired Gain in Reproduction and Production Traits in Hariana Cattle

Invited Review. Value of genomics in breeding objectives for beef cattle

IMPACT OF SEED STOCK SELECTION ON THE ECONOMICS OF A COW-CALF OPERATION

The Data Which Breeders May Collect For BREEDPLAN Analysis Includes: Flight time (from bail head to light beam)

Proceedings, The Range Beef Cow Symposium XXIII December 3, 4 and 5, 2013 Rapid City, South Dakota

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

ORGANIZATION OF ON-FARM BREEDING PLANS FOR BEEF CATTLE R.G. BEILHARZ* Summary

CROSSBREEDING STRATEGIES: INCLUDING TERMINAL VS. MATERNAL CROSSES

Crossbreeding Systems in Beef Cattle 1

Welcome to Igenity Brangus and the Power of Confident Selection

Genetics of milk yield and fertility traits in Holstein-Friesian cattle on large-scale Kenyan farms J. M. Ojango and G. E. Pollott

Long Calving Seasons. Problems and Solutions

Beef calf weights at 100 days and 205 days as indicators of dams' producing ability

Simulation study on heterogeneous variance adjustment for observations with different measurement error variance

Can Selection Indexes Improve Profitability in Beef Cattle

Short communication. Marko Čepon, Mojca Simčič, Špela Malovrh. Oddelek za zootehniko. Univerza v Ljubljani, Slovenia

Fertility in Angus females

Heterosis and Breed Effects for Beef Traits of Brahman Purebred and Crossbred Steers

Genetic Correlations Among Body Condition Score, Yield, and Fertility in First-Parity Cows Estimated by Random Regression Models

Genetic parameters and genetic trends for age at first calving and calving

Introduction to Indexes

Development of breeding objectives for beef cattle breeding: Derivation of economic values

Breed Comparisons of Weight, Weight Adjusted for Condition Score, Height, and Condition Score of Beef Cows

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

Genetics of dairy production

Effects of Artificial Insemination and Natural Service Breeding Systems on Steer Progeny Backgrounding Performance

Simulation study on heterogeneous variance adjustment for observations with different measurement error variance

Derivation of Economic Values of Longevity for Inclusion in the Breeding Objectives for South African Dairy Cattle

Beef Improvement New Zealand Inc.

Importance of Feed Efficiency

A Basic Guide to. BREEDPLAN EBVs BREEDPLAN

CROSSBREEDING SYSTEMS FOR ARIZONA RANGELANDS

MCA/MSU Bull Evaluation Program 2016 Buyer Survey and Impact Report

Beef Cattle Handbook

Heritability of persistency traits and their genetic correlations with milk yield and udder morphology in dairy sheep.

29 th Annual BIC Bull Sale

More beef calves from the dairy industry: a survey

Residual feed intake and greenhouse gas emissions in beef cattle

Delivering Valued Genomic Products to Livestock Customers

BREEDPLAN EBVs The Traits Explained

Beef Performance Testing: Questions and Answers

Measurement error variance of testday observations from automatic milking systems

SELECTION IN HEREFORD CATTLE. SELECTION INTENSITY, GENERATION INTERVAL AND INDEXES IN RETROSPECT

MILK PRODUCTION IN HEREFORD COWS

Operation of a genomic selection service in Ireland

Practical integration of genomic selection in dairy cattle breeding schemes

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION IRISH BEEF CATTLE INDUSTRY THE FORMATION OF ICBF BEEF BREEDING OBJECTIVES & SELECTION CRITERIA

Productive Longevity in Beef Cows. Jim Sanders, Animal Science Dept., Texas A&M University

Factors Influencing Genetic Change for Milk Yield within Farms in Central Thailand*

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

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

Short communication: Genetic evaluation of stillbirth in US Brown Swiss and Jersey cattle

A new international infrastructure for beef cattle breeding

French report - Interbeef WG 20th and 21st June

Breeding Program of the Bulgarian Murrah Buffalo

Transcription:

South African Journal of Animal Science 2012, 42 (Issue 5, Supplement 1) Peer-reviewed paper: Proc. 44 th Congress of the South African Society for Animal Science Estimation of genetic parameters for growth traits in Brangus cattle F.W.C. Neser 1#, J.B. van Wyk 1, M.D. Fair 1, P. Lubout 2 & B.J. Crook 3 1 Department of Animal, Wildlife and Grassland Sciences, University of the Free State, PO Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa; 2 Brangus Cattle Breeders Society, P.O. Box 12465, Brandhof, Bloemfontein, 9324, South Africa 3 Agricultural Business Research Institute, UNE Armidale NSW 2351, Australia Copyright resides with the authors in terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 South African Licence. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/za/ Condition of use: The user may copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work, but must recognise the authors and the South African Journal of Animal Science Abstract A combination of multiple trait and repeatability models were used to estimate genetic parameters for birth weight (BW), weaning weight (WW), yearling weight (YW), eighteen month weight (FW) and three measurements of mature weight (MW) using 23 768 records obtained from the South African Brangus Cattle Breed Society. The data covered a period of 7 generations from 1985 to 2010. Direct heritability estimates obtained were 0.21 ± 0.024, 0.23 ± 0.021, 0.22 ± 0.025, 0.29 ± 0.029 and 0.24 ± 0.019 for BW, WW, YW, FW and MW, respectively. Maternal heritability estimates for birth weight and weaning weight were 0.05 ± 0.01 and 0.11 ± 0.001, respectively. The direct genetic correlations between the different traits were all positive, ranging from moderate (0.43 ± 0.081) between YW and MW to high (0.99 ± 0.043) between WW and FW. Keywords: (Co)variance components and ratios, repeatability models, South African Brangus cattle # Corresponding author: neserfw@ufs.ac.za Introduction The prediction of breeding values requires knowledge of the magnitude of the (co) variances of random effects in a model. Incorrect (co)variance components could lead to biased breeding values, especially in multiple trait analysis of growth traits, where erosion of records takes place over time because of selection and culling of animals. It could also lead to an incorrect measurement of the effectiveness of genetic selection. As there is limited information available on the genetic parameters for growth traits in Brangus cattle, the aim of the study was to estimate (co)variance components specific for the South African Brangus population which will be used in the national genetic evaluation of the breed. Material en Methods Data from 73 676 animals for birth weight (BW; n = 41 572), weaning weight (WW; n = 23 104), yearling weight (YW; n = 9 114) eighteen month weight (FW; n = 6 450) and mature weight (MW; n = 9 258) were originally available to estimate (co)variance components and subsequent genetic parameters in the breed. All incomplete records, as well as records outside four standard deviations from the mean, were disregarded. Herds with less than three years of recording, as well as contemporary groups with less than five records were also removed from the final data set used for analyses. The final dataset consisted of 53 841 weight records obtained from 23 768 animals in 78 herds, collected over a period of 26 years (1985 to 2010). A total of 1 623 sires and 415 sires of sires, as well as 18 491 dams with 1 028 sires of dams and 5 729 dams of dams were present in the data. The pedigree file consists of 58 973 animals born over a period of 8 generations. URL: http://www.sasas.co.za ISSN 0375-1589 (print), ISSN 222-4062 (online) Publisher: South African Society for Animal Science Guest editor: C.J.C. Muller http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v42i5.5

470 Table 1 Descriptive statistics of data after editing that were used in the analyses Trait Number of records Mean Standard deviation Minimum Maximum Birth weight 16735 33.1 4.6 15 50 Weaning weight 16569 222.6 39.1 68 378 Yearling weight 7763 293.4 67.8 110 490 Eighteen month weight 5539 379.0 73.8 194 672 Mature weight 7235 475.2 94.0 220 850 The Brangus is a composite breed and in South Africa, an open register system is used. As different breed combinations are involved, it also means that heterosis can play a role in the estimation of genetic parameters. It is therefore important to include breed composition in the analysis. There were 1 398 different breed combinations that were consolidated into seven broad combinations according to likeness in breed composition and weaning weight performance. Table 2 Mean (SE) weights of calves for the respective breed composition groups Breed composition n Birth Weaning Yearling Eighteen months Mature (55:45) (60:40) (65:35) (70:30) (75:25) x Other (60:38:2) Brahman x Angus (50:50) 1740 32.8 (4.4) 223 (40.4) 287 (66.6) 380 (76.2) 481 (96.5) 1784 33.0 (4.5) 230 (40.4) 304 (67.6) 380 (76.2) 482 (92.9) 969 33.8 (4.8) 229 (38.8) 312 (74.9) 383 (67.3) 492 (92.6) 12579 33.0 (4.6) 220 (38.9) 291 (67.0) 377 (72.9) 470 (94.3) 2494 33.2 (4.6) 224 (37.7) 295 (64.2) 374 (68.6) 477 (91.2) 852 33.5 (4.5) 222 (40.9) 283 (71.3) 369 (78.8) 482 (98.2) 1255 32.8 (5.1) 224 (11.8) 297 (14.3) 389 (15.9 486 (88.6) n = number of animals in each breed category. Other fixed effects fitted were a concatenation of herd-year-season, sex and damage. Two distinct calving seasons were identified: from September to March was classified as season one, while April to August was classified as season two. Age of dam was expressed in years, starting with dams of two years and younger. All dams older than six years were grouped together. The following traits were corrected for weighing age to simplify the analysis: weaning-, yearling- and eighteen month weight. Estimates of (co)variance components were obtained using the ASREML program (Gilmour et al., 2009) fitting single trait animal models. Mature cow weight, defined as the weight of the cow when the calf is weaned, was fitted as a repeated trait, with up to three weights possible per cow.

471 The following final models were fitted: BW & WW: y = Xb + Z 1 a+z 2 m+z 3 hysxs+e with cov(a,m)=0 YW & AW: y = Xb + Z 1 a+e MW: y 1,2,3 = Xb + Z 1 a+e Where: y = a vector of observations (BW, WW, YW, AW) y 1,2,3 = a vector of repeated observations for mature weight b = a vector of fixed effects a = a vector of direct additive genetic effects m = a vector of maternal additive effects hysxs = a vector of herd-year-season x sire interaction e = a vector of residuals X, Z 1, Z 2 and Z 3 = incidence matrices relating observations to their respective fixed and random effects It was assumed that: V(a) = A 2 a; V(m) = A 2 m; V(hysxs) = I 2 hysxs; V(e) = I 2 e Where I is an identy matrix, 2 a, 2 m, 2 hysxs, and 2 e is the direct additive-, maternal additive-, HYSxS - and environmental variance respectively. The significance of random effects was tested using the log likelihood ratio tests after inclusion of one random effect in the model. A random effect was considered significant when its inclusion in the model caused a significant improvement in the log likelihood ratio. A chi-square distribution of = 0.05 at one degree of freedom was used as a test statistic (3.841). When -2 times the difference between the log likelihoods was greater than this critical value, the inclusion of the particular random effect was considered to significantly improve the fit of the model (Swalve, 1993). The estimates obtained in the single trait analyses also act as starting values for the multiple trait analysis. Results and Discussion All non-genetic factors tested were significant (P <0.01) for all the traits under consideration and were thus included in the subsequent (co)variance analyses. A summary of the (co)variance components and ratios obtained in the analysis is presented in Table 3. Table 3 Estimates (SE) of (co)variance components and ratios obtained from the multiple trait analyses Parameters Birth Weaning Yearling Eighteen month Mature Variance components Direct additive 3.36 185.31 420.21 589.38 1168.34 Maternal additive 0.84 86.46 HYSxS 1.19 81.10 Error 10.77 462.21 1500.60 1475.36 3633.11 Phenotypic 16.16 815.07 1920.80 2064.70 4801.40 Variance ratios Direct 0.21 (0.024) 0.23 (0.021) 0.22 (0.025) 0.29 (0.029) 0.24 (0.019) Maternal 0.05 (0.010) 0.11 (0.009) HYSxS 0.07 (0.010) 0.10 (0.008) Direct and maternal heritability estimates for all the traits are within the parameter range described in the literature, albeit in the lower sector. Literature values for direct and maternal heritability estimates for

472 BW vary from 0.07 (direct) and 0.04 (maternal) (Diop & Van Vleck, 1998) to 0.62 (direct) (Schoeman & Jordaan, 1999) and 0.24 (maternal) (Mohiuddin, 1993). The same values for WW vary from 0.07 (direct) (Plasse et al., 2002) and 0.06 (maternal) (Haile-Mariam & Kessa-Mersa, 1995) to 0.57 (direct) (Schoeman & Jordaan, 1999) and 0.21 (maternal) (Diop & Van Vleck, 1998). Direct heritability estimates for the other weight traits from the literature are: YW = 0.16 (Meyer, 1992) to 0.41 (Mohiuddin, 1993), FW = 0.13 (Plasse et al., 2002) to 0.22 (Meyer, 1992; Mostert et al., 1998) and MW = 0.33 (Crook et al., 2010) to 0.50 (Koots et al., 1994a). The reason for the inclusion of HYSxS is well documented (Meyer, 1987; Neser et al., 1996; Van Niekerk et al., 2004). The high value of the HYSxS ratio for weaning weight (0.10) was, however, surprising, indicating that some re-ranking of sires might occur over different contemporary groups. This is higher than the value obtained by Neser et al. (1996) (0.08) in Bonsmara cattle as well as Pico et al. (2004) (0.06) in Brahman cattle. As shown in Table 4, the direct genetic correlations between the different traits were all positive, ranging from moderate (0.44 between YW and MW) to high (0.99 between WW and FW). These results correspond to results obtained by Koots et al. (1994b), Van Niekerk et al. (2004) in Nguni cattle, Pico et al. (2004) in Brahman cattle and Van Niekerk et al. (2006) in Limousin cattle. Table 4 Genetic correlations (SE) between the different traits in the analysis Traits Weaning Yearling Eighteen month Mature Birth weight 0.78 (0.058) 0.57 (0.075) 0.60 (0.073) 0.63 (0.070) Weaning weight 0.86 (0.052) 0.99 (0.043) 0.94 (0.052) Yearling weight 0.85 (0.048) 0.43 (0.081) Eighteen month weight 0.75 (0.064) Conclusion Direct heritability estimates were moderate (above 0.21) for all live weight traits while direct genetic correlations between the different traits were all positive, ranging from moderate (0.43) to high. This means that in animal breeding no decision can be taken in isolation. Selection on one trait will thus have consequences on all other traits as well. The estimation of (co)variance components should be seen as the first step in developing a proper breeding objective for the breed. References Crook, B.J., Neser, F.W.C. & Bradfield, M.J., 2010. Genetic parameters for cow weight at calving and at calf weaning in South African Simmental cattle. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 40, 140-144. Diop, M. & Van Vleck, L.D., 1998. Estimates of genetic parameters for growth traits of Gobra cattle. Anim. Sci. 66, 349-355. Gilmour, A.R., Cullis, B.R., Welham, S.J. & Thompson, R., 1999. ASREML Reference Manual. NSW Agriculture Biometric Bulletin No.3 NSW Agriculture, Orange Agriculture Institute, Forest Road, Orange 2800 NSW, Australia. Haile-Mariam, M. & Kassa-Mersa, H., 1995. Estimates of direct and maternal covariance components of growth traits in Boran cattle. J. Anim. Breed. 113, 43-55. Koots, K.R., Gibson, J.P. & Wilton, J.W., 1994a. Analyses of published genetic parameter estimates for beef production traits. 1. Heritability. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 62, 309-388. Koots, K.R., Gibson, J.P. & Wilton, J.W., 1994b. Analyses of published genetic parameter estimates for beef production traits. 1. Phenotypic and genetic correlations. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 62, 825-853. Meyer, K., 1987. Estimates of variance due to sire x herd interactions and environmental co-variances between paternal half-sibs for first lactation dairy production. Livest. Prod. Sci. 17, 95-114.

473 Meyer, K., 1992. Variance components due to direct and maternal effects for growth traits of Australian beef cattle. Livest. Prod. Sci. 31, 179-204. Mostert, B.E., Groeneveld, E., Rust, T. & Van der Westhuizen, J., 1998. Multitrait variance component estimation of South African beef breeds for growth traits. Proc 6 th Wrld Congr. Genetics Appl. Livest. Prod. 23, 145-152. Mohiuddin, G., 1993. Estimates of genetic and phenotypic parameters of some performance traits in beef cattle Anim. Breed. Abstr. 61, 495-522. Neser, F.W.C., Konstantinov, K.V. & Erasmus, G.J., 1996. The inclusion of herd-year-season by sire interaction in the estimation of genetic parameters in Bonsmara cattle. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 26, 75-78. Pico, B.A., Neser, F.W.C. & Van Wyk, J.B., 2004. Genetic parameters for growth traits in South African Brahman cattle. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 34 (supplement 2), 44-46. Plasse, D., Verde, O., Fossi, H., Romero, R., Hoogesteijn, R., Bastidas, P. & Bastardo, J., 2002. (Co)variance components, genetic parameters and annual trends for calf weights in a pedigree Braham herd under selection for three decades. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 119, 141-153. Schoeman, S.J. & Jordaan, G.F., 1999. Multitrait estimation of direct and maternal (co)variances for growth and efficiency traits in a multibreed beef cattle herd. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 29, 124-136. Swalve, H.H., 1993. Estimation of direct and maternal (co)variance components for growth traits in Australian Simmental beef cattle. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 110, 241-252. Van Niekerk, M. & Neser, F.W.C., 2006. Genetic parameters for growth traits in South African Limousin cattle. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 36, 5 (Suppl 1), 6-9. Van Niekerk, M., Neser, F.W.C. & Van Wyk, J.B., 2004. (Co)variance components for growth traits in the Nguni cattle breed S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 34 (Issue 6, Suppl. 2), 113-115.