The effectiveness of genomic selection for milk production traits of Holstein dairy cattle
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objective: This study was conducted to test the efficiency of genomic selection for milk production traits in a Korean Holstein cattle population. Methods: A total of 506,481 milk production records from 293,855 animals (2,090 heads with single nucleotide polymorphism information) were used to estimate breeding value by single step best linear unbiased prediction. Results: The heritability estimates for milk, fat, and protein yields in the first parity were 0.28, 0.26, and 0.23, respectively. As the parity increased, the heritability decreased for all milk production traits. The estimated generation intervals of sire for the production of bulls (LSB) and that for the production of cows (LSC) were 7.9 and 8.1 years, respectively, and the estimated generation intervals of dams for the production of bulls (LDB) and cows (LDC) were 4.9 and 4.2 years, respectively. In the overall data set, the reliability of genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) increased by 9% on average over that of estimated breeding value (EBV), and increased by 7% in cows with test records, about 4% in bulls with progeny records, and 13% in heifers without test records. The difference in the reliability between GEBV and EBV was especially significant for the data from young bulls, i.e. 17% on average for milk (39% vs 22%), fat (39% vs 22%), and protein (37% vs 22%) yields, respectively. When selected for the milk yield using GEBV, the genetic gain increased about 7.1% over the gain with the EBV in the cows with test records, and by 2.9% in bulls with progeny records, while the genetic gain increased by about 24.2% in heifers without test records and by 35% in young bulls without progeny records. Conclusion: More genetic gains can be expected through the use of GEBV than EBV, and genomic selection was more effective in the selection of young bulls and heifers without test records.
Abstract
Objective: This study was conducted to test the efficiency of genomic selection for milk production traits in a Korean Holstein cattle population. Methods: A total of 506,481 milk production records from 293,855 animals (2,090 heads with single nucleotide polymorphism information) were used to estimate breeding value by single step best linear unbiased prediction. Results: The heritability estimates for milk, fat, and protein yields in the first parity were 0.28, 0.26, and 0.23, respectively. As the parity increased, the heritability decreased for all milk production traits. The estimated generation intervals of sire for the production of bulls (LSB) and that for the production of cows (LSC) were 7.9 and 8.1 years, respectively, and the estimated generation intervals of dams for the production of bulls (LDB) and cows (LDC) were 4.9 and 4.2 years, respectively. In the overall data set, the reliability of genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) increased by 9% on average over that of estimated breeding value (EBV), and increased by 7% in cows with test records, about 4% in bulls with progeny records, and 13% in heifers without test records. The difference in the reliability between GEBV and EBV was especially significant for the data from young bulls, i.e. 17% on average for milk (39% vs 22%), fat (39% vs 22%), and protein (37% vs 22%) yields, respectively. When selected for the milk yield using GEBV, the genetic gain increased about 7.1% over the gain with the EBV in the cows with test records, and by 2.9% in bulls with progeny records, while the genetic gain increased by about 24.2% in heifers without test records and by 35% in young bulls without progeny records. Conclusion: More genetic gains can be expected through the use of GEBV than EBV, and genomic selection was more effective in the selection of young bulls and heifers without test records.
참고문헌 (30)
- Mulder HA, "Imputation of genotypes with low-density chips and its effect on reliability of direct genomic values in Dutch Holstein cattle", J Dairy Sci, 95, pp.876~889 (2012)[DOI]
- Boison SA, "Strategies for single nucleotide polymorphism(SNP)genotyping to enhance genotype imputation in Gyr(Bos indicus)dairy cattle : Comparison of commercially available SNP chips", J Dairy Sci, 98, pp.4969~4989 (2015)[DOI]
- Gaspa G, "Assessment of genomic selection for introgression of polledness into Holstein Friesian cattle by simulation", Livest Sci, 179, pp.86~95 (2015)[DOI]
- Winkelman AM, "Application of genomic evaluation to dairy cattle in New Zealand", J Dairy Sci, 98, pp.659~675 (2015)[DOI]
- García-Ruiz A, "Changes in genetic selection differentials and generation intervals in US Holstein dairy cattle as a result of genomic selection", Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 113, pp.E3995~4004 (2016)[DOI]
- Danai Jattawa, "Imputation Accuracy from Low to Moderate Density Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Chips in a Thai Multibreed Dairy Cattle Population", Animal Bioscience, 29(4), pp.464~470 (2016), 아세아·태평양축산학회[DOI]
- Nguyen TTT, "Genomic selection for tolerance to heat stress in Australian dairy cattle", J Dairy Sci, 99, pp.2849~2862 (2016)[DOI]
- Gengler N, "A simple method to approximate gene content in large pedigree populations : application to the myostatin gene in dual-purpose Belgian Blue cattle", Animal, 1, pp.21~28 (2007)[DOI]
- VanRaden PM, "Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions", J Dairy Sci, 91, pp.4414~4423 (2008)[DOI]
- Misztal I, "Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information", J Dairy Sci, 92, pp.4648~4655 (2009)[DOI]
- Liu Z, "A Single-step genomic model with direct estimation of marker effects", J Dairy Sci, 97, pp.5833~5850 (2014)[DOI]
- "Interbull routine genetic evaluation for dairy production traits" (2017)[URL]
- VanRaden PM, "Reliability of genomic predictions for North American Holstein bulls", J Dairy Sci, 92, pp.16~24 (2009)[DOI]
- Uemoto Y, "Effect of genotyped cows in the reference population on the genomic evaluation of Holstein cattle", Animal, 11, pp.382~393 (2017)[DOI]
- Schaeffer LR, "Multiple-country comparison of dairy sires", J Dairy Sci, 77, pp.2671~2678 (1994)[DOI]
- Sullivan PG, "Development of genomic GMACE", Interbull Bulltein, 40, pp.157~161 (2009)
- Misztal I, "Manual for BLUPF90 family of programs" (2015), University of Georgia
- Powell RL, "Different lactations for estimating genetic merit of dairy cows", J Dairy Sci, 64, pp.321~330 (1981)[DOI]
- Montaldo HH, "Genetic and environmental parameters for milk production, udder health, and fertility traits in Mexican Holstein cows", J Dairy Sci, 93, pp.2168~2175 (2010)[DOI]
- Stachowicz K, "Rates of inbreeding and genetic diversity in Canadian Holstein and Jersey cattle", J Dairy Sci, 94, pp.5160~5175 (2011)[DOI]
- Meuwissen THE, "Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps", Genetics, 157, pp.1819~1829 (2001)
- Forni S, "Different genomic relationship matrices for single-step analysis using phenotypic, pedigree and genomic information", Genet Sel Evol, 43, pp.1~ (2011)[DOI]
- Christensen OF, "Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped", Genet Sel Evol, 42, pp.2~ (2010)[DOI]
- Christensen OF, "Single-step methods for genomic evaluation in pigs", Animal, 6, pp.1565~1571 (2012)[DOI]
- Ding X, "Accuracy of genomic prediction for milk production traits in the Chinese Holstein population using a reference population consisting of cows", J Dairy Sci, 96, pp.5315~5323 (2013)[DOI]
- Wiggans GR, "Genomic selection in dairy cattle : The USDA experience", Annu Rev Anim Biosci, 5, pp.309~327 (2016)[DOI]
- Weigel KA, "Genomic selection of dairy cattle : a review of methods, strategies, and impact", J Anim Breed Genet, 1, pp.1~15 (2017)[DOI]
- Falconer DS, "Introduction to quantitative genetics" (1966), Longman
- Goddard M, "Genomic selection : prediction of accuracy and maximisation of long term response", Genetica, 136, pp.245~257 (2009)[DOI]
- Lund MS, "Review : How to improve genomic predictions in small dairy cattle populations", Animal, 10, pp.1042~1049 (2016)[DOI]