John B. Cole Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 20705-2350 2015 2015.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

John B. Cole* and Paul M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

Advertisements

Impact of selection for increased daughter fertility on productive life and culling for reproduction H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright*, R. H. Miller Animal Improvement.

How Genomics is changing Business and Services of Associations Dr. Josef Pott, Weser-Ems-Union eG, Germany.

But who will be the next GREAT one?. USA Bull Proofs * Bulls are ranked based upon their DAUGHTER’S (progeny) production and physical characteristics.

Mating Programs Including Genomic Relationships and Dominance Effects Chuanyu Sun 1, Paul M. VanRaden 2, Jeff R. O'Connell 3 1 National Association of.

WiggansARS Big Data Workshop – July 16, 2015 (1) George R. Wiggans Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,

Changes in the use of young bulls K. M. Olson* 1, J. L. Hutchison 2, P. M. VanRaden 2, and H. D. Norman 2 1 National Association of Animal Breeders, Columbia,

December 2014 Proof Changes

George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD National Association.

Wiggans, th WCGALP (1) G.R. Wiggans*, T.A. Cooper, D.J. Null, and P.M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research.

John B. Cole* and Paul M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

Bovine Genomics The Technology and its Applications Gerrit Kistemaker Chief Geneticist, Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) Many slides were created by.

John B. Cole 1, Daniel J. Null *1, Chuanyu Sun 2, and Paul M. VanRaden 1 1 Animal Genomics and Improvement 2 Sexing Technologies Laboratory Navasota, TX.

John B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD , USA The use and.

2007 Paul VanRaden, Mel Tooker, Jan Wright, Chuanyu Sun, and Jana Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD National Association of Animal.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA San Antonio.

2007 Paul VanRaden, George Wiggans, Jeff O’Connell, John Cole, Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Tad Sonstegard, and Curt Van Tassell Bovine Functional.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Missouri Dairy Summit.

John B. Cole Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD Using.

Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2004 Genetic Base and Trait Definition Update.

John B. Cole, Ph.D. Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD, USA The U.S. genetic.

2007 J.B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Overview.

2006 Paul VanRaden, John Cole, and George Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

2005 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA Selection for.

Genetic Evaluation of Lactation Persistency Estimated by Best Prediction for Ayrshire, Brown Swiss, Guernsey, and Milking Shorthorn Dairy Cattle J. B.

T. A. Cooper and G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD Council.

2002 Paul VanRaden, Ashley Sanders, Melvin Tooker, Bob Miller, and Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA,

Adjustment of selection index coefficients and polygenic variance to improve regressions and reliability of genomic evaluations P. M. VanRaden, J. R. Wright*,

Genetic interactions for heat stress and herd yield level: predicting foreign genetic merit from domestic data J. R. Wright*, P. M. VanRaden Animal Genomics.

2003 Melvin Tooker, Paul VanRaden, Ashley Sanders, and George Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,

2007 J.B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Genetic Evaluation.

J. B. Cole * and P. M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

Paul VanRaden and Melvin Tooker* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD 2006.

2007 Melvin Tooker Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA

John B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Best prediction.

WiggansCDCB industry meeting – Sept. 29, 2015 (1) George R. Wiggans Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,

G.R. Wiggans* and P.M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

John B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD AIPL Report.

2003 P.M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Genetic Evaluations.

2006 Mid-Atlantic Dairy Grazing Conference, 2006 (1) Is There a Need for Different Genetics in Dairy Grazing Systems? H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L.

2006 H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

J. B. Cole *, G. R. Wiggans, P. M. VanRaden, and R. H. Miller Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,

2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA

Paul VanRaden and John Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2004 Planned Changes to Models and Trait Definitions.

Genetic and environmental factors that affect gestation length H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, M. T. Kuhn, S. M. Hubbard,* and J. B. Cole Animal Improvement.

2007 John B. Cole USDA Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2008 Data Collection Ratings and Best Prediction.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD NDHIA 2009 meeting.

2003 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Genetic Evaluation.

Multi-trait, multi-breed conception rate evaluations P. M. VanRaden 1, J. R. Wright 1 *, C. Sun 2, J. L. Hutchison 1 and M. E. Tooker 1 1 Animal Genomics.

2005 Paul VanRaden and Mel Tooker Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Genetic.

2003 P.M. VanRaden* and M.E. Tooker Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Definition.

H.D. Norman* J.R. Wright, P.M. VanRaden, and M.T. Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.

2006 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Predicting Genetic.

2007 John Cole, Paul VanRaden, George Wiggans, and Melvin Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD,

2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (1) Heterosis and Breed Differences for Yield and Somatic Cell Scores of US Dairy Cattle in the 1990’s. PAUL VANRADEN Animal.

2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA 2008 New.

H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Dairy Cattle Reproductive.

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD Select Sires‘ Holstein.

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2011 National Breeders.

2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA 2007 Genetic evaluation.

G.R. Wiggans, T. A. Cooper* and P.M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

CRI – Spanish update (1) 2010 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.

John B. Cole Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD What direction should.

2007 Paul VanRaden 1, Curt Van Tassell 2, George Wiggans 1, Tad Sonstegard 2, Bob Schnabel 3, Jerry Taylor 3, and Flavio Schenkel 4, Paul VanRaden 1, Curt.

John B. Cole Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2016 AGIL Report.

Correlations Among Measures of Dairy Cattle Fertility and Longevity

A National Sire Fertility Index

Percent of total breedings

Increased reliability of genetic evaluations for dairy cattle in the United States from use of genomic information Abstr.

Economics of Reproduction: the Quality of the Pregnancy

Presentation transcript:

John B. Cole Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD AGIL Report

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (2) Cole Meet the new lab, same as the old lab The Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory and the Bovine Functional Genomics Laboratory were merged into the Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory in April, The Animal Improvement Program continues with the same personnel and slightly increased funding.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (3) Cole Comings and goings Dr. Kristen Parker Gaddis arrived from NCSU in August. Dr. Chuanyu Sun accepted a position with Sexing Technologies in November.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (4) Cole Base change Genetic bases for all traits were updated by 5 years. For most traits of most breeds, average PTA decreased. Changes for each breed are reported in “Genetic Base Changes for December 2014.” “Genetic Base Changes for December 2014.” The next base change is scheduled for 2020.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (5) Cole Net merit revised Economic values in net merit (NM$) were updated and 2 more fertility traits (HCR, CCR) were included. Grazing merit (Gay et al., 2014) is recommended for herd owners desiring to improve fertility to maintain seasonal calving cycles. See “Net Merit as a Measure of Lifetime Profit: 2014 Revision” for more details.“Net Merit as a Measure of Lifetime Profit: 2014 Revision”

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (6) Cole Trait Relative emphasis on traits in index (%) NM$ 1994 NM$ 2000 NM$ 2003 NM$ 2006 NM$ 2010 NM$ 2014 GM$ 2014 Milk65000 Fat Protein PL SCS–6–9 –10–7-6 UDC … FLC … BDC …–4–3–4–6–5-4 DPR … … HCR … …… ……23 CCR … …… … … 1 5 CA$ …… New index weights

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (7) Cole Redefine Pregnancy Rate Derived from days open using Non-linear: 21 / (DO – VWP + 11) Linear approx: (233 – DO) / 4 Weight by number of opportunities Now more similar to conception rate Previously equal weights for DPR Weights = n / [1 + (n – 1) repeat] Heritability = 1.4% / 21 days (was 4.0% / lactation)(was 4.0% / lactation)

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (8) Cole Genetic SD 35% larger (2.3 vs. 1.7) Cows open at 250 DIM no longer assumed pregnant DPR requires weighted average of PR rather than simple average Faster testing using new software Properties of DPR change

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (9) Cole Weekly evaluations Approximate genomic evaluations for new animals will be computed weekly for recently received genotypes. Will include new animals and animals with genotypes that became usable since the previous weekly evaluation. Supports the earlier sale or culling of animals (or embryos) not needed for breeding purposes to minimize the expense of raising newborn calves.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (10) Cole Genomic inbreeding for mating programs Genomic relationships of genotyped females with marketed males are now provided for genomic mating programs. The use of genomic instead of pedigree inbreeding can improve economic merit by $30 per heifer calf. Switching from random mating to a genomic mating program will reduce genomic inbreeding by >3 percentage points and increase calf merit by $72 for Holsteins, $103 for Jerseys, and $67 for Brown Swiss.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (11) Cole Brown Swiss haplotype for polled A Brown Swiss haplotype for polled (BHP) was developed using nearly the same methods as for HHP and JHP. Most polled BS have the same haplotype and pedigrees tracing to BSUSA MEADOW VIEW RENDITION NP, born As of February, 18,558 BS were genotyped, 152 were heterozygous BHP, and 4 were homozygous polled.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (12) Cole Determination of polled status Laboratory tests for polled are used as data, and US and Canadian bulls with ≥500 daughters and not designated as polled are assumed homozygous normal. Brown Swiss, Holstein, and Jersey polled haplotypes have frequencies of 0.41%, 0.93%, and 2.22%, respectively. An animal is heterozygous if it has either mutation, and is homozygous if both haplotypes contain polled.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (13) Cole Gene content for polled Gene content (GC) is the number of polled haplotypes in an animal's genotype, and ranges between 0 and 2. Computed using records from genotyped relatives. Predictions checked by comparing known polled status to GC for 1,615 non-genotyped Jerseys with known status.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (14) Cole Gene content for polled (cont’d) 97% of horned animals were correctly assigned GC near 0. Heterozygous polled animals had GC near 0 (52%) and near 1 (47%). Expected GC near 1 for heterozygotes, but can be lower if many polled ancestors have unknown status or pedigree is unknown. Polled status for non-genotyped animals can be accurately determined, and this method can be used for other haplotypes.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (15) Cole Genotype-by-environment interaction GxE was estimated with random regressions for heat stress (HS) and herd production level (HL). The goal was to improve predictions of future records and rankings in other climate and production situations. Coefficients for HS were the state’s July average THI; coefficients for HL were mgmt level weighted means for ECM divided by breed-year mean ECM.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (16) Cole GxE interaction (cont’d) Coefficients were standardized to mean 0 and variance 1. Estimated regression coefficients for sire and dam EBV were always near their expected values of 0.5 and did not change when HS or HL interactions were added to the model. Squared correlations increased by <.0003 for both HS and HL; increases for non-yield traits were even smaller.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (17) Cole GxE interaction (cont’d) Another test used MACE to predict rankings of the same bulls in the US and 14 other countries. HS was significant (P<0.05) in 9 of the 14 countries for milk and protein, and 10 for fat; HL was significant in 8 countries for milk, 5 for protein, and just 1 for fat. Current genetic predictions perform very well in a variety of environments.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (18) Cole Genotypes as far as the eye can see Chip NameCountChip NameCount 50K V166,832ZLD118,692 50K V279,896ZMD3,506 3K63,271ELD801 HD3,596LD29,480 LD167,978GP374,208 GGP68,600ZL2100,687 GHD32,172ZM20 GGP2105,193Total894,912

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (19) Cole A new low-cost chip was announced ~4,100 SNP Built-in validation Single-gene tests Lower imputation accuracy if neither parent genotyped Imputation accuracy within 1% of LD chip if at least 1 parent genotyped

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (20) Cole New NextSeq 500 DNA sequencer Much faster – Results in 29 hours instead of 2 weeks. Fewer samples – Four lanes per flow cell. More data – Additional computing resources were added.

50 th National DHIA Annual Meeting, Columbus, OH, March 11, 2015 (21) Cole Questions?