Effects of complex vertebral malformation gene on production and reproduction M. T. Kuhn*, J. L. Hutchison, and C. P. Van Tassell Animal Improvement Programs.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Genes Located on chromosomes Thousands found in each animal
Advertisements

Relationship of somatic cell score with fertility measures Poster 1390 ADSA 2001, Indiannapolis R. H. Miller 1, J. S. Clay 2, and H. D. Norman 1 1 Animal.
2002 Paul M. VanRaden and Ashley H. Sanders Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD
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.
Breed composition of the United States dairy cattle herd R. L. Powell,* H. D. Norman, and J. L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural.
2005 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD AIPL Projects.
ADSA 2002 (HDN-P1) 2002 Comparison of occurrence and yields of daughters of progeny-test and proven bulls in artificial insemination and natural- service.
2007 Jana L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD , USA
2002 Curt Van Tassell Gene Evaluation and Mapping Laboratory and Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,
India Emerging Markets Conference, May 2009 (1) Leigh Walton Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,
2001 ADSA annual meeting, July 2001 (1) Timeliness of progeny-testing through AI and percentage of bulls returned to service (abstract 1020) H.D. NORMAN,*
George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD National Association.
ASAS/ADSA 2001 Conference (1) 2001 Variance of effects of lactation stage within herd by herd yield N. Gengler 1,2, B. Auvray *,1, and G.R. Wiggans 3 1.
Performance of Holsteins that originated from embryo transfer or twin births H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright* and R.L. Powell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory,
Comparison of Holstein service-sire fertility for heifer and cow breedings with conventional and sexed semen H. D. Norman*, J. L. Hutchison, and P. M.
2002 ADSA 2002 (HDN-1) H.D. NORMAN* ( ), R.H. MILLER, P.M. V AN RADEN, and J.R. WRIGHT Animal Improvement Programs.
2003 G.R. Wiggans,* P.M. VanRaden, and J.L. Edwards Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD
Assessment of voluntary waiting period and frequency of estrus synchronization among herds R.H. Miller, 1, * H.D. Norman, 1 M.T. Kuhn, 1 and J.S. Clay.
AFGC Convention 2004 (1) 2004 Possibilities for Improving Dairy Cattle Performance Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.
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.
REGRESSION MODEL y ijklm = BD i + b j A j + HYS k + b dstate D l + b sstate S l + b sd (S×SD m ) + b dherd F m + b sherd G m + e ijklm, y = ME milk yield,
Genetic correlations between first and later parity calving ease in a sire-maternal grandsire model G. R. Wiggans*, C. P. Van Tassell, J. B. Cole, and.
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.
2002 Paul VanRaden, Ashley Sanders, Melvin Tooker, Bob Miller, and Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA,
Synchronization Effects on Parameters for Days Open M. T. Kuhn, J. L. Hutchison, and R. H. Miller* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural.
2003 Melvin Tooker, Paul VanRaden, Ashley Sanders, and George Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,
Factors affecting heifer fertility in U.S. Holsteins M. T. Kuhn* and J. L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service,
Effect of temperature and humidity on gestation length H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright,* and J.B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.
Effects of dam’s dry period length on calf M. T. Kuhn,* J. L. Hutchison, and H. D. Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.
Accuracy of reported births and calving dates of dairy cattle in the United States Poster 1705 ADSA 2001, Indiannapolis H. D. Norman *,1, J. L. Edwards,
Factors that affect abortion frequency in dairy herds in the United States R.H. Miller,* M.T. Kuhn, H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright Animal Improvement Programs.
John B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Best prediction.
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
Methodology for Prediction of Bull Fertility from Field Data M. T. Kuhn* and J. L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.
J. B. Cole 1,*, P. M. VanRaden 1, and C. M. B. Dematawewa 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,
XX International Grassland Conference 2005 (1) 2005 Genetic Alternatives for Dairy Producers who Practise Grazing H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L. Powell.
Norman, 2014ICAR / Interbull annual meeting, Berlin, Germany, May 20, 2014 (1) Dr. H. Duane Norman Interim Administrator Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding.
Prediction of Service Sire Fertility M.T. Kuhn 1 *, J.L. Hutchison 1, and J.S. Clay 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agriculture Research Service,
Paul VanRaden and John Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2004 Planned Changes to Models and Trait Definitions.
H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright, and R.H. Miller Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA
WiggansARS Big Data Computing Workshop (1) 2013 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,
George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Select Sires’
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.
Minimum Dry Period Length to Maximize Performance M. T. Kuhn*, J. L. Hutchison, and H. D. Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.
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.
ADSA 2002 (RHM-P1) 2002 R.H. Miller, ,1 H.D. Norman, 1 and J.S. Clay 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA,
Ashley H. Sanders and H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD
2002 George R. Wiggans and Curt P. Van Tassell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD
H.D. Norman* J.R. Wright, P.M. VanRaden, and M.T. Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.
H. D. Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD DRMS annual.
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.
C.P. Van Tassell 1, * G.R. Wiggans 1, J.C. Philpot 1, and I. Misztal Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA,
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.
CRI – Spanish update (1) 2010 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.
2005 P.M. VanRaden and M.E. Tooker* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Effect.
2006 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production (1) Trait Selection When Culling U.S. Holsteins H.D. Norman, J.L. Hutchison, J.R. Wright,
H.D. NORMAN,* R.L. POWELL, J.R. WRIGHT
Correlations Among Measures of Dairy Cattle Fertility and Longevity
Contribution of inbreeding and recessive defects to early embryo loss
Use of a threshold animal model to estimate calving ease and stillbirth (co)variance components for US Holsteins.
M.T. Kuhn* and P. M. VanRaden USDA-AIPL, Beltsville, MD
Effectiveness of genetic evaluations in predicting daughter performance in individual herds H. D. Norman 1, J. R. Wright 1*, C. D. Dechow 2 and R. C.
Reproductive trends of dairy herds in the United States
Relationship of gestation length to stillbirth
Presentation transcript:

Effects of complex vertebral malformation gene on production and reproduction M. T. Kuhn*, J. L. Hutchison, and C. P. Van Tassell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Abstract T INTRODUCTION ◆ Complex vertebral malformation (CVM) is a congenital defect found in Holstein calves that causes stillborn and aborted fetuses ◆ CVM is inherited through a single recessive gene ◆ Malformed legs, shortened neck, and dwarfism are physical defects caused by CVM ◆ Progenitor of CVM: Penstate Ivanhoe Star born January 1963 ◆ In 2002, Sattler reported a gene frequency of 5 to 9% in current Holstein cows OBJECTIVES ◆ Estimate the effect of the CVM allele on lactational milk, fat, and protein yield, SCS, and days open (DO) MATERIALS & METHODS ◆ Holstein cows calving from 2000 to 2004 ◆ Sire required to have a valid NAAB id and a known CVM genotype for analysis 10% of available records deleted because of unknown sire genotype ◆ Total of 4,458,541 records (459,731 CV records; 3,998,810 TV records) and 27,710 herds ◆ Model included: y = HY + YSM + parity + sire genotype + PE + A + e y = ME milk, ME fat, ME protein, SCS, or DO HY = herd-year of calving YSM = year-state-month of calving Parity = lactation 1 or 2+ Sire genotype = CV or TV CV: Tested for CVM and found to carry the gene TV: Tested, or verified by pedigree, to be free of CVM PE = permanent environment effect A = animal effect RESULTS Frequencies of CV, TV, and unknown bulls 1 Number of CV, TV, and unknown bulls that entered AI from 1964 through qMilk, kgFat, kgProtein, kgSCSDO no adj Phenotypic differences between CV and TV cows Due to Mendelian sampling and matings to cows of various CVM genotypes, daughters of CV (Cc) bulls could be homozygous normal and daughters of TV (CC) bulls could be heterozygous. Thus, the mean (daughter) difference between these 2 groups of bulls does not estimate Cc-CC; rather, it estimates the quantity: where q is the frequency of the CVM allele. Therefore, the mean difference between CV and TV bulls was multiplied by (q+1)(q+2) for varying levels of q to get an estimate of the effect of the CVM genotype, unbiased by genotypic frequencies of daughters. Phenotypic differences for milk, fat, protein, SCS, and DO between CV and TV daughters with no adjustment (no adj.), 0, 5, and 10% gene frequencies (q). 2 Year entered AI % CV bulls % TV bulls % unknown bulls CONCLUSIONS ◆ Prior to 2002, about 25 to 40% of bulls with NAAB codes were of unknown CVM genotype. Since 2002, about 6 to 8% have unknown genotype. Decisions on whether to test a bull for CVM may depend on outcome of early proofs. ◆ There appears to be some effect of CVM on milk, fat, and protein yield (carrier advantage) but little or no effect on fertility or SCS. ◆ The small effect on DO could be due to carrier x carrier matings. FUTURE RESEARCH ◆ Investigate use of mixture models to account for bulls with an unknown CVM genotype ◆ Estimate the effects of the CVM allele on type traits 1 Unknown bulls are potential CVM carriers because they had a known carrier ancestor but were not tested for CVM 2 Positive differences indicate higher mean for CV cows Percent of CV, TV, and unknown bulls that entered AI from 1990 through CV unknown TV