210 likes | 223 Views
Explore planned changes to models and trait definitions in animal genetics from November 2004 to February 2005. Updates include longevity for Holstein bulls, adjustments for inbreeding, and more.
E N D
November 2004 Changes • Pregnancy checks used in days open predictions (130-250 DIM) • Longevity for foreign Holstein bulls • Single-trait longevity from Interbull • Multi-trait processing at AIPL • Foreign bull mean PL REL = 46% (was 38%), NM$ REL = 72% (was 71%) • 15 countries (Other breeds Feb. 2005)
2005 Trait and Model Changes • Adjust for past inbreeding (F) and expected future inbreeding (EFI) • Adjust for differing parity SD • Express yield PTA to 36-month age instead of mature equivalent • Use cow instead of bull base for DPR • Use 3.00 instead of breed means for SCS
Inbreeding AdjustmentsVanRaden and Smith, 1999, JDS 82:2771 • F (past inbrd.) and EFI (future inbrd.) • Regression on F in animal model (PTA0) • PTAEFI = PTA0 + EFI * byield.F • Corr (current PTA, PTAEFI) = .9976 • Genetic trend for PTAEFI is reduced • Yield trend 6% less, DPR 14% lower, PL 25% lower, SCS becomes slightly unfavorable • Predict NM$EFI = NM$ + 7 (Fdaus) – 14 (EFI)
Use in Mating Programs • Replace EFI with progeny F • PA NM$ = (NM$sire + NM$dam)/2 • Progeny merit = PA NM$ – 14 [Fprog - (EFIsire - EFIdam)/2] • Similar to calving ease • NM$ includes average value of SCE • SCE has higher value for heifer matings, lower for cow matings
Parity SD Adjustments • Multiplicative or additive adjustments? • Neither makes variances quite equal • Combined approach (Funk et al, 1991 JDS) • Lactation 1-5 deviations multiplied by • [1.06 .99 .94 .89 .85] (milk, fat, protein) • [ .97 .99 1.01 1.02 1.02] (SCS) • [1.03 1.00 .98 .97 .96] (DPR) • Helps pass Interbull trend test 1 • Corr (official, adjusted PTA) = .9998
Age Adjustment for Yield PTA • Use 36 months vs. mature equivalent • Standardized and actual means similar • Age factors are estimated more precisely • More fair when breed maturity rates differ • Proposed previously by USDA • McDaniel (1973, JDS 56:959), Schutz (1994) • Recommended by Holstein GAC, Oct 1994 • Vetoed by Council in 1994 “to allow the industry time to consider the nature and effect of such a change.”
Actual vs Standardized Means(current CA data, all lactations)
Calving Ease Changes (Feb. 2005) • Joint BSW-HOL evaluation (pending NAAB approval) • 11,793 BSW, 3431 BSW-HOL calvings • 12 million HOL calvings • Includes breed-of-MGS effect • Uses HOL (co)variance components and breed-specific bases
Calving Ease Model Validation • Results passed Interbull trend validation • Joint BSW-HOL results compared to single-breed evaluations • Correlations showed BSW data did not adversely affect HOL results.
Future Research • Genetic evaluation of crossbreds • Productive life trait definition • Lactation length, yield correlations • Trend tests prevent inbreeding adj. • Yield trait model improvements • Mendelian sampling variance • Persistency, rate of maturity
Summary • Longevity from Interbull in Nov 2004 • Brown Swiss calving ease in Feb 2005 • Adjustments for inbreeding and for differing parity SD in Feb 2005 • Age adjustment to 36 months instead of mature will affect breed means and SD