Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection ------------------- Disease resistance in Cattle Larry V. Cundiff ARS-USDA-U.S. Meat Animal Research Center.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Enterprise:Animal Science Unit:Basic Genetics Factor Information needed I. Intro.A. The use of genetics to improve animals can not be overlooked by producers.

Advertisements

15 The Genetic Basis of Complex Inheritance

Beef Cattle. Angus Brahman Charolais Hereford.

Introduction to Maize Breeding

Heterosis: Defined and Research Experience

Animal Breeding Systems

West Virginia University Extension Service Genetics in Beef Cattle Wayne R. Wagner.

What we know (and don’t know) about pneumonia in beef calves prior to weaning David R. Smith, DVM, PhD Mississippi State University College of Veterinary.

Natural Selection Four factors:

Chapter 17 – Evolution of Populations

What do we know about genetics role in cattle diseases? Larry Kuehn Research Geneticist US Meat Animal Research Center.

Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium

Detection of QTL in beef cattle Eduardo Casas U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, Nebraska.

1 15 The Genetic Basis of Complex Inheritance. 2 Multifactorial Traits Multifactorial traits are determined by multiple genetic and environmental factors.

Unit 10 Chapter 39 Immunity from Disease

Scott Williams ARI Wet Lab Manager Former Brood Operations Manager / Genetics Research Clear Springs Foods.

Preventive Herd Health and Vaccination Cow/Calf Production Unit.

Selecting the Right Genetics (Matching Cows to your Environment) David W. Schafer Arizona Beef Day July 29, 2009.

Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection

Bull selection based on QTL for specific environments Fabio Monteiro de Rezende Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE) - Brazil.

Genetic Selection for Disease Resistance: Challenges and Opportunities Gary Snowder Research Geneticist USDA, ARS, MARC.

Applied Beef Cattle Breeding and Selection Composite Populations Larry V. Cundiff ARS-USDA-U.S. Meat Animal Research Center 2008 Beef Cattle Production.

Matching Beef Genetics with Production Environment T. G. Jenkins and C. L. Ferrell USDA, ARS, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Clay Center NE.

Genetics of the Black Polled Hereford By: Cassady Wilson.

Training, Validation, and Target Populations Training, Validation, and Target Populations Mark Thallman, Kristina Weber, Larry Kuehn, Warren Snelling,

Beef Relationships using 50K Chip Information L.A. Kuehn, J.W. Keele, G.L. Bennett, T.G. McDaneld, T.P.L. Smith, W.M. Snelling, T.S. Sonstegard, and R.M.

Heterosis – The Forgotten Tool? Dr. Tom Field Colorado State University Dr. Andy Herring Texas A&M University Cattlemen’s College 2005 NCBA Meeting, San.

Heredity Edited by: Jessica Hawley From Colorado Agri-science Curriculum.

Matt Spangler Beef Genetics Specialist University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Pink Eye James Reecy Annette O’Connor Abebe Hassen Gary Snowder.

Improving the health and healthfulness of beef J.M. Reecy, and D.C. Beitz Iowa State University.

Economic Benefits of using Genetic Selection to Reduce the Prevalence of Bovine Respiratory Disease Complex in Beef Feedlot Cattle H.L. Neibergs 1, J.S.

Genes Within Populations

ConceptS and Connections

Breeding and Genetics 101.

Key Area 3: Crop protection Unit 3: Sustainability and Interdependence.

Dr. Gordon F. Jones Professor of Animal Science / Retired Western Kentucky University.

Breed and Trait Selection Considerations Dan W. Moser Dept. of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University.

Straightbreeding – A simple way to reduce your bottomline D. A. Daley California State University, Chico NCBCEC Brown Bagger Session October 17, 2012.

Tools of the Trade Tom Field, PhD Andy Herring, PhD.

Designing Genetics and Selection for Seedstock Breeders, Commercial Cattlemen and Show Ring Enthusiasts ASA Fall Focus 2015: Confidence Builds Success.

The Brown Bagger Beef Cattle Adaptability Current Tools of Assessment John L. Evans Oklahoma State University 1.

1 Application of Molecular Technologies in Beef Production Dan W. Moser, Ph.D Department of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University, Manhattan.

Animal Genetics. Natural Selection n an organisms ability to SURVIVE and pass on its GENETIC information to its offspring.

CROSSBREEDING SYSTEMS for BEEF CATTLE By David R. Hawkins Michigan State University.

1 Multi-Breed Evaluation For Growth Traits J. Keith Bertrand University of Georgia, Athens.

In-Service: Animal Breeding and Genetics Dr. Alan Fahey March 24 th 2011 NCE-MSTL, University of Limerick.

Multi-breed Evaluation J. Keith Bertrand University of Georgia, Athens.

All Dairy Producers Want More Healthy Cows The Problem Difficult to improve genetically – low heritability Poor data quality & inconsistency in disease.

Commercial Ranch Project and DNA testing John Pollak Cornell University.

Evolution and Human Health. I.Motivation Evolutionary principles can contribute to understanding of origin and treatment of human disease Evolutionary.

Use of DNA information in Genetic Programs.. Next Four Seminars John Pollak – DNA Tests and genetic Evaluations and sorting on genotypes. John Pollak.

Selection of Breeding Program An S 426 Fall 2007.

Beef Cattle Production

Selecting for Favorable Genetic Response to Disease

Host disease genetics: bovine tuberculosis resistance in

Chapter 47 Section 3 pp HIV AND AIDS. VACCINES  Vaccines artificially produce acquired immunity  Vaccine- substance that contains antigen.

EPD’s: What They Are and How to Use Them. Introduction EPDs = Expected Progeny Differences Progeny = Offspring, usually the offspring of the sire Differences.

Growth and development Part two: Genetic factors: breeds Animal sex and hormones Climate Revision.

Parasitology. Introduction Continue Immunity to parasites Over millions of years of evolutions, parasites become well adapted to their hosts and show.

Overview What is Plant Breeding? Basic Genetics Mendelian Genetics

Crossbreeding in Beef Cattle Susan Keene A portion of these slides work of: Matthew I. Miller Extension Agent Animal Science This presentation is from.

MASTITIS RESISTANCE New breeding tools for improving mastitis resistance in European dairy cattle QLK5-CT

Molecular genetic in Animal Production

Quantitative Variation

Spring 2009: Section 5 – Lecture 1

Modes of Natural Selection

acquired immunity humoral response antibodies (tag invaders)

Unit 9: Evolution 9.5 Genes and Variation.

Breeding & Genetics.

Presentation transcript:

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

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

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

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 Heritability =.08 Incidence post weaning (Snowder et al., 2008) Mean incidence by breed (deviation from Angus) Angus 0.00 Hereford4.23 Charolais2.72 Gelbvieh4.09 MARC I1.90 MARC II3.68 MARC III1.08 Differences between breeds were not significant (P >.05)

ISheep eryth.Primary fold Pigeon eryth.response IISheep eryth.Primary fold IIISalm. typh.Secondary1690 fold IVSalm. typh.Secondary1285 fold VBov. Ser. Alb.Heperimmun7310 fold Rabbit gammaalum precip. globulinantigen Immuni- No. gen. Est. No. Antigens zation to sel. Diff. Herit- independ. Sel. used proc. limit (H/L) ability loci CHARACTERISTICS OF FIVE SELECTION LINES FOR HIGH (H) VERSUS LOW (L) ANTIBODY PRODUCTION IN MICE (Biozzi et al., 1982)

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

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.

Antibody responsiveness Macrophage activity Severe epidemic infections Severe epidemic infections macrophage dependent immunity antibody dependent immunity All types of mild endemic infections 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) H X L cross F 2 hybrids

Severe epidemic infections Severe epidemic infections All types of mild endemic infections Under Severe Epidemic Infection dependent on macrophage immunity – Favors AA genotypes, extreme individuals (aa) would be eliminated and heterozygotes (Aa) would also be susceptible to elimination. H X L cross F 2 hybrids All types of mild endemic infections Severe epidemic infections Antibody responsiveness Macrophage activity macrophage dependent Immunity (favors AA genotypes) antibody dependent Immunity (favors aa genotypes) All types of mild endemic infections

Severe epidemic infections Severe epidemic infections All types of mild endemic infections Under severe epidemic infection dependent on antibody immunity – Favors aa genotypes, extreme individuals (AA) would be eliminated and heterozygotes (Aa) would also be susceptible to elimination. H X L cross F 2 hybrids All types of mild endemic infections Severe epidemic infections Antibody responsiveness Macrophage activity macrophage dependent Immunity (favors AA genotypes) antibody dependent Immunity (favors aa genotypes) All types of mild endemic infections

Antibody responsiveness Macrophage activity Severe epidemic infections Severe epidemic infections macrophage dependent Immunity (favors AA genotypes) antibody dependent Immunity (favors aa genotypes) All types of mild endemic infections 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. H X L cross F 2 hybrids

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

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.