Including feed intake data from U.S. Holsteins in genomic prediction

Similar documents
Alternative strategies for improving feed efficiency and sustainability

Where can the greatest economic value of genomic testing be found?

2/22/2012. Impact of Genomics on Dairy Cattle Breeding. Basics of the DNA molecule. Genomic data revolutionize dairy cattle breeding

, 2018 (1) AGIL

11/30/2018. Introduction to Genomic Selection OUTLINE. 1. What is different between pedigree based and genomic selection? 2.

Using Genomics to Improve the Genetic Potential and Management of Your Herd

Using genotypes to construct phenotypes for dairy cattle breeding programs and beyond

Breeding for Feed Efficiency: Yes We Can!

Walking the Cattle Continuum: Moving from the BovineSNP50 to Higher and Lower Density SNP Panels

Strategy for Applying Genome-Wide Selection in Dairy Cattle

Single- step GBLUP using APY inverse for protein yield in US Holstein with a large number of genotyped animals

Genomic selection in cattle industry: achievements and impact

Genomic selection applies to synthetic breeds

Genetic Evaluations. Stephen Scott Canadian Hereford Association

BLUP and Genomic Selection

Enhancing the Data Pipeline for Novel Traits in the Genomic Era: From farms to DHI to evaluation centres Dr. Filippo Miglior

Single step genomic evaluations for the Nordic Red Dairy cattle test day data

What dairy farmers should know about genetic selection

Subproject 1: Dairy cattle

Age-Season Standardization

Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle

João Dürr Interbull Centre Director. Animal identification and traceability Interbull s s and Interbeef s perspectives

Genetic improvement: a major component of increased dairy farm profitability

Practical integration of genomic selection in dairy cattle breeding schemes

Genetics Effective Use of New and Existing Methods

1.1 Present improvement of breeding values for milking speed

Economic Impact of Bull Choices... A.I. Or Otherwise

Big Data, Science and Cow Improvement: The Power of Information!

TWENTY YEARS OF GENETIC PROGRESS IN AUSTRALIAN HOLSTEINS

Genetic Selection Opportunities to Improve Feed Efficiency

Current Reality of the Ayrshire Breed and the Opportunity of Technology for Future Growth

Application of MAS in French dairy cattle. Guillaume F., Fritz S., Boichard D., Druet T.

Delivering Valued Genomic Products to Livestock Customers

Genomic Postcard from Dairy Cattle Breeding GUDP Project. Søren Borchersen, Head R&D VikingGenetics

National DHIA Annual Meeting CDCB Report

Genomic selection in the Australian sheep industry

Genomic prediction. Kevin Byskov, Ulrik Sander Nielsen and Gert Pedersen Aamand. Nordisk Avlsværdi Vurdering. Nordic Cattle Genetic Evaluation

GENETIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR HEIFER FERTILITY DR. HEATHER J. HUSON ROBERT & ANNE EVERETT ENDOWED PROFESSORSHIP OF DAIRY CATTLE GENETICS

EFFICIENCY OF THE COW HERD: BULL SELECTION AND GENETICS

The promise of genomics for animal improvement. Daniela Lourenco

An Economic Comparison of AI and Bull Breeding

Value of cooperative phenotypic databases in the genomics era

Fundamentals of Genomic Selection

Genetic evaluations for crossbred Holstein x bos indicus cattle in India

Decoding genomic selection and the benefit for unconventional traits

Genetic Parameters and Evaluation of Rear Legs (Rear View) for Brown Swiss and Guernseys

Genetic analysis of heat tolerance for production and health traits in US Holstein cows

Revisiting the a posteriori granddaughter design

ESTIMATION OF BREEDING VALUES OF SAHIWAL CATTLE USING TEST DAY MILK YIELDS

Making sense of the numbers

Implementation of dairy cattle breeding policy in Ethiopia some reflections on complementary strategies

Use of data from electronic milking meters and perspective in use of other objective measures

Why Crossbreed?? Dr. Tom Lawlor, Holstein USA

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

Managing genetic groups in single-step genomic evaluations applied on female fertility traits in Nordic Red Dairy cattle

Optimization of dairy cattle breeding programs using genomic selection

Feed efficiency and genetics. My context. Feed costs important for farmer. History. Roel Veerkamp. Globally feed efficiency important

STUDIES ON THE VALUE OF INCORPORATING EFFECT OF DOMINANCE IN GENETIC EVALUATIONS OF DAIRY CATTLE, BEEF CATTLE, AND SWINE

Genetic Analysis of Cow Survival in the Israeli Dairy Cattle Population

Profitable Dairy Cow Traits for Future Production Circumstances

Traditional Genetic Improvement. Genetic variation is due to differences in DNA sequence. Adding DNA sequence data to traditional breeding.

Genetic Improvement Using Young Sires With Genomic Evaluations Bennet Cassell, Professor and Extension Specialist, Dairy Science, Virginia Tech

Phenotyping that maximizes the value of genotyping. Mike Coffey SAC ICAR 2011

Canadian Hereford Association

Reliability of Genomic Evaluation of Holstein Cattle in Canada

Economic trade-offs between genetic improvement and longevity in dairy cattle 1

Statistical Indicators

The what, why and how of Genomics for the beef cattle breeder

CDCB tools for the improvement of the Jersey breed

Individual Genomic Prediction Report

Bull Selection Strategies Using Genomic Estimated Breeding Values

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D. Cooperative Extension Specialist

Section 9- Guidelines for Dairy Cattle Genetic Evaluation

GENOMICS AND YOUR DAIRY HERD

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

Breeding your cows for genetic gain. Max Tweedie, B+LNZ Genetics

Youngstock Survival in Nordic Cattle Genetic Evaluation

LowInputBreeds & Genomic breeding

Evidence of improved fertility arising from genetic selection: weightings and timescale required

Investigation on Genotype by Environment Interaction for Milk Yield of Holstein Cows in Luxembourg and Tunisia

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

Understanding Results

Genetics of dairy production

Breeding Program of the Bulgarian Murrah Buffalo

MateSel: A Software Mating Tool to Aid in Selection for Improved Fertility

DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARD METHODS TO ESTIMATE MANURE PRODUCTION AND NUTRIENT CHARACTERISTICS FROM DAIRY CATTLE

A review of how dairy farmers can use and profit from genomic technologies

QTL Mapping, MAS, and Genomic Selection

Genomic Management: Impact on Sustainability

Profiting from Information Management and Genomics

Heifer rearing cost: Critical control points

Why should registered and commercial breeders of Holsteins and Jerseys support an industry working together to insure a national dairy database?

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Genome wide association and genomic selection to speed up genetic improvement for meat quality in Hanwoo

Z. Liu, R. Reents, F. Reinhardt, and K. Kuwan United Datasystems for Animal Production (VIT), Heideweg 1, D Verden, Germany

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

Genomic selection for sheep and beef systems, dispelling the myths for farmers. Dewi Jones January 2016

Statistical Indicators

Genetics to meet pastoral farming requirements in the 2020 s a dairy perspective. Phil Beatson, R&D Manager CRV Ambreed

Transcription:

Including feed intake data from U.S. Holsteins in genomic prediction Paul, 1 Jeff O Connell, 2 Erin Connor, 1 Mike VandeHaar, 3 Rob Tempelman, 3 and Kent Weigel 4 1 USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, Beltsville, MD, USA 2 University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA 3 Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA 4 University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA paul.vanraden@ars.usda.gov 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (1)

Feed intake topics Residual feed intake (RFI) as a new trait Data included, models, and parameters Reliability of predictions Economic value of feed saved Reporting of feed intake evaluations 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (2)

Feed intake data Research herd Cows Records Researchers Univ. of Wisconsin and US Dairy Forage Res. Ctr. 1,390 1,678 Weigel, Armentano Iowa State Univ. 953 1,006 Spurlock ARS, USDA (Beltsville, MD) 534 834 Connor Univ. of Florida 491 582 Staples Michigan State Univ. 273 315 VandeHaar, Tempelman Purina Anim. Nutr. Ctr. (MO) 151 184 Davidson Virginia Tech 93 93 Hanigan Miner Agric. Res. Inst. (NY) 58 58 Dann All 3,965 4,823 $5 million AFRI grant 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (3)

Genotypes of research cows Chip densities (number of markers) used 502 high density (777K) 1341 GHD or GH2 (77K or 140K) 1251 50K or ZMD (50K) 411 low density (7K to 20K) Imputed to 60,671 subset used officially 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (4)

National RFI genomic evaluation RFI from research cows already adjusted for phenotypic correlations with milk net energy, metabolic body weight, and weight change Genetic evaluation model: RFI = breeding value + permanent environment + herd sire + management group + age-parity + b 1 (inbreeding) + b 2 (GPTA milk net energy ) + b 3 (GPTA BW composite ) Remove remaining genetic correlations and include 60 million nongenotyped Holsteins Genomic model: Predict 1.4 million genotyped Holsteins 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (5)

Variance estimates for RFI (and SCS) Parameter RFI SCS Heritability (%) 14 16 Repeatability (%) 24 35 Phenotypic correlation with yield 0.00 0.10 Genetic correlation with yield 0.00 0.03 SCS provided a 2nd trait with similar properties, which allowed genomic predictions from research cows to be compared with national SCS predictions 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (6)

Estimation of genomic reliability Correlation of genomic predictions from research cow data (GEBV r ) vs. national data (GEBV n ) for SCS Observed REL = corr(gebv r, GEBV n ) 2 * national REL 5-way cross-validation Use RFI records of 80% of cows to predict RFI records of remaining 20% Exclude cows from the validation data if they had daughters in the reference data Observed REL = corr(gebv r, RFI) 2 / heritability Choose discount to match computed to observed REL 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (7)

Computed vs. actual GREL for SCS Expected genomic reliability of young animals was 19% for both RFI and SCS using standard discount of 0.7 SCS GPTA correlated by only 0.39 for national vs. research-cow reference data Observed REL of SCS was (0.39) 2 72% = 11% Genomic REL was discounted by a factor of 0.3 to agree with Var(PTA) for RFI and observed REL of SCS 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (8)

5-way cross-validation Trait Reliability Reliability method Traditional Genomic Difference RFI Observed 13.4 18.1 +4.7 Expected 1 14.0 21.2 +7.2 SCS Observed 17.6 23.0 +5.4 Expected 1 16.4 24.7 +8.3 1 Expected REL calculated from parent average for cows not in the reference, or from genomic REL calculated using a discount factor of 0.3. 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (9)

RFI reliability by animal group Animal group RFI Reliability (%) Traditional Genomic 1 3,965 cows with RFI phenotypes 30 34 Top 10 sires with most RFI daughters 78 85 Top 100 Net Merit progeny tested sires 8 16 Top 100 Net Merit young bulls 3 12 1.5 million genotyped Holsteins 5 13 60 million non-genotyped Holsteins 3 3 1 Computed with discount factor of 0.3 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (10)

Economic values Statistic Milk production (3.5% F, 3.0% P) Dry matter intake Residual feed intake Price/pound $0.17 $0.12 $0.12 Mean income or $4,250 $1,992 0 cost/lactation Lifetime value/pound $0.253 $0.336 $0.336 (2.8 lactations) Relative value (% of NM$) 36% 16% Since 2000, Net Merit $ has selected for smaller cows using type traits (body weight composite) to reduce expected feed intake (-6% of NM$) Economic values for yield and BWC already account for correlated feed intake, and RFI measures uncorrelated intake 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (11)

Reporting feed efficiency Feed efficiency expected from yield and type traits FE$ is milk income feed cost expected from PTAs for milk, fat, protein, and body weight composite (type) Current definition used in TPI New FE$ = FE$ RFI$ Feed saved (used in AUS, also USA proposal) FeedSaved$ combines RFI$ and regression on body weight composite, but not yield trait regressions 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (12)

Economic progress Ratio of progress from new vs. old index is square root of [REL NM$ (194 2 ) + REL RFI (70 2 )]/[REL NM$ (194 2 )] Ratio of progress is small (1.01) because REL RFI (12%) is much lower than REL NM$ (75%) Extra 1% faster progress is worth $4.5 million per year to the U.S. dairy industry 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (13)

Early feed intake studies at USDA Hooven et al., JDS 51:1409 1419, 1968 661 lactations of 318 Holstein cows at Beltsville Genetic correlation (feed efficiency, milk energy) = 0.92 Hooven et al., JDS 55:1113 1122, 1972 10-mo intake trials for 425 cows 30-d trial (month 5) gave 89% of progress 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (14)

Conclusions Producers and researchers have always wanted to measure and select for feed efficiency RFI could get ~16% of relative emphasis in net merit, but low REL of ~12% for young animals will limit progress Genomics can multiply feed intake information from a few herds to thousands of other herds Higher REL will require more research herds or international cooperation 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (15)

Acknowledgments Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grant #2011-68004- 30340 from USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (feed intake funding) USDA-ARS project 1265-31000-101-00, Improving Genetic Predictions in Dairy Animals Using Phenotypic and Genomic Information (AGIL funding) Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding and dairy industry contributors for pedigree and genomic data Jim Liesman (MSU) for merging and editing phenotypes George Wiggans for managing genotypes 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (16)

6-week or 4-week trials 6-week 4-week Days of feed intake 42 28 Cows recorded 4,621 202 RFI mean 0 0 RFI standard deviation (kg/day) 1.68 1.75 Correlation with 6-week trial 1.00 0.96 Weighted in statistical model 1.00 0.92 Approximate cost of recording (+1 week pre-trial) $700 $500 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Auckland, New Zealand, February 11-15, 2018 (17)