1 / 11

Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection ------------------- Disease resistance in Cattle

Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection ------------------- Disease resistance in Cattle. Larry V. Cundiff ARS-USDA-U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. 2008 Beef Cattle Production Management Series-Module V Great Plains Veterinary Education Center University of Nebraska, Clay Center

jorden-park
Download Presentation

Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection ------------------- Disease resistance in Cattle

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. Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection ------------------- Disease resistance in Cattle Larry V. Cundiff ARS-USDA-U.S. Meat Animal Research Center 2008 Beef Cattle Production Management Series-Module V Great Plains Veterinary Education Center University of Nebraska, Clay Center September 19, 2008

  2. Mastitis in dairy cattle Heritability = .10 to .20 ( Miller 1982) Attention given to somatic cell count In selection of dairy cattle. Bovine major histocompatability complex (BOLA) genotype has been associated with incidence of mastitis (Solbu et al., 1982) W2 highly resistant to mastitis W16 susceptable to mastitis

  3. Infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis (IBK), pinkeye Heritability = .22 (Snowder et al., 2005) • Incidence fluctuates greatly from year to year ( over 20 year period, < 1% to 25% per year, generally < 10%) • Incidence can be greater in Herefords than other breeds (Frisch 1975; Webber and Selby, 1981; Snowder et al., 2005) • Incidence may be associated with greater homozygosity in Herefords

  4. Bovine Respiratory Disease (BRD) (Snowder et al., 2008) Postweaning (18,112 records) - Incidence ranged from 5 to 42% in 14 year period from 1987 to 2001. Heritability = .08 Incidence post weaning (Snowder et al., 2008) Mean incidence by breed (deviation from Angus) Angus 0.00 Hereford 4.23 Charolais 2.72 Gelbvieh 4.09 MARC I 1.90 MARC II 3.68 MARC III 1.08 Differences between breeds were not significant (P > .05)

  5. CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE SELECTION LINES FOR HIGH (H) VERSUS LOW (L) ANTIBODY PRODUCTION IN MICE (Biozzi et al., 1982) Immuni- No. gen. Est. No. Antigens zation to sel. Diff. Herit- independ. Sel. used proc. limit (H/L) ability loci I Sheep eryth. Primary 16 220 fold .20 9-11 Pigeon eryth. response II Sheep eryth. Primary 13 103 fold .21 2-8 III Salm. typh. Secondary 16 90 fold .20 4-7 IV Salm. typh. Secondary 12 85 fold .21 2-4 V Bov. Ser. Alb. Heperimmun 7 310 fold .22 2-4 Rabbit gamma alum precip. globulin antigen

  6. SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON RESISTANCE OF HIGH (H) AND LOW (l) MICE TO VARIOUS INFECTIONS (Biozzi et al., 1982) Degree of resistance Infection Innate resistance Acquired resistance H L H L F berghei - - +++ + Antibody T. Cruzi+++ - n.d. -dependent N. dubius- - +++ + immunity Rabies virus - - +++ + T Spiralis ++ + ++ ++ S typohimurium+ ++ + ++++ Macrophage T. pestis+ ++ + ++++ dependent B. abortus suis + ++ ++ ++++ immunity L tropica + +++ n.d. n.d. S. mansoni + ++ ++++++

  7. Conclusions of Biozzi et al. • High response lines were more resistant to infections dependent upon antibody immunity. • Low lines were more resistant to infections dependent on macrophage immunity. • In most cases the line that was spontaneously more resistant also was protected by vaccination to a higher degree.

  8. All types of mild endemic infections macrophage dependent immunity antibody dependent immunity Severe epidemic infections Severe epidemic infections H X L cross F2 hybrids Antibody responsiveness Macrophage activity Theory for evolution of host parasite interaction in genetically heterogeneous populations according to inverse polygenic control of antibody production and macrophage activity (Biozzi et al., 1982)

  9. All types of mild endemic infections antibody dependent Immunity (favors aa genotypes) macrophage dependent Immunity (favors AA genotypes) Severe epidemic infections Severe epidemic infections H X L cross F2 hybrids Antibody responsiveness Macrophage activity Under mild endemic infection – Favors Aa genotypes, extreme individuals (AA or aa) would be eliminated by susceptability to diseases dependent on macrophage (or antibody) immunity.

  10. Effects of different degrees of dominance on phenotypic value No Dominance (additive) Partial dominance Complete dominance Over- dominance

  11. Theory of host parasite interaction • Theory is consistent with effects of heterosis and benefits of crossbreeding • Unfortunately, selection for resistance to a specific disease may lead to resistance for one group of diseases but susceptibility for another group of diseases. • Specialized paternal and maternal lines may be best answer. • With aid of vaccination procedures in parental seedstock populations and DNA marker assisted selection, • It may be possible to select for one type of disease resistance in paternal lines and another type of disease resistance in maternal lines. • Then genetic resistance could be realized with vast majority of cattle produced commercially by mating complementary maternal and sire breeds.

More Related