1 / 12

62 th Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science

Genetic evaluations for birth weight: comparison of continuous and discrete definitions of birth weight under varying accuracies of recording Waurich 1) , B., Wensch-Dorendorf 1) , M., Cole, J.B. 2) and Swalve, H.H. 1). 62 th Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science

hyman
Download Presentation

62 th Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Genetic evaluations for birth weight: comparison of continuous and discrete definitions of birth weight under varying accuracies of recording Waurich1), B., Wensch-Dorendorf1), M., Cole, J.B. 2) and Swalve, H.H. 1) 62th Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science Stavanger, Norway August 29th-September 2nd, 2011. Session 36, Paper 2 • 1Group Animal Breeding, University of Halle, Theodor-Lieser-Str.11, D-016120 Halle/Saale Germany, • 2Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA.

  2. Introduction • many countries have calving problems • birth weight is highly heritable and strongly connected with dystocia • documentation of birth weight takes economic efforts  weighing or scoring?

  3. Introduction • Data from Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania cooperator test herd scheme with precise documentation ( 22 herds from 2005 ) • Documentation for all calvings of a herd (also stillborn) • Weighing of all calves • heifers (41±4,5kg) and cows (45±5,2kg)

  4. The Idea For birth weight parameter estimation: weighing necessary or subjective scoring precise enough ? frame birth weight muscle mass Weighing data: For research purposes  manipulation of data  grouping weights into in classes

  5. Manipulation of weight data - varying accuracies A Birth weight B +RANUNI(-1,0,1) C +RANUNI(-1,0,1) +RANUNI(-1,0,1) D + N(0,1.5) E + N(0,2)

  6. Calf size - The discrete definitions Continuous Birth weight Five Classes, each about 20 Percent of weighings verylight light medium heavy very heavy Birth weightThresholds 39 42 44 48 Three Classes equal, each about 33 Percent of weighings light medium heavy 41 45 Three Classes wide, thresholds 25, 75 Percent of weighings light medium heavy 40 47

  7. Outcome of class allocations

  8. Model • yijklmno = µ + Hi + YSj + PARk + SEXl + sirem + mgsn + eo Calculation of genetic parameters Calculation of maternal breeding value

  9. Heritabilities and genetic correlations maternal Genetic correlations range between -0.02 and 0.15

  10. Rank correlations of EBVswith undistorted original birth weight

  11. Conclusions • - birth weight heritability is situated mainly on calf side • - manipulation of documentation accuracy leads to reduced heritabilities • - subsumming into discrete variables leads to decreased heritabilities  decrease is far not as strong as expected  estimated breeding values stay robust • This study may not be a perfect imitation of the outcome of a subjective • scoring system (where farmers may describe weights inaccurately), but some • assessment of such a system is given

  12. End

More Related