Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(1) T.A. Cooper, G.R. Wiggans and P.M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Genomic imputation and evaluation using 1074 high density Holstein genotypes P. M. VanRaden 1, D. J. Null 1 *, G.R. Wiggans 1, T.S. Sonstegard 2, E.E.

Advertisements

2002 Paul M. VanRaden and Ashley H. Sanders Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

Genomic evaluation of Ayrshire dairy cattle and new haplotypes affecting fertility and stillbirth in Holstein, Brown Swiss and Ayrshire breeds T.A. Cooper*,

Wiggans, 2014CDCB meeting – August 5 (1) G.R. Wiggans Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD

George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Select Sires’

G.R. Wiggans 1, T.S. Sonstegard 1, P.M. VanRaden 1, L.K. Matukumalli 1,2, R.D. Schnabel 3, J.F. Taylor 3, J.P. Chesnais 4, F.S. Schenkel 5, and C.P. Van.

Wiggans, 2013RL meeting, Aug. 15 (1) Dr. George R. Wiggans, Acting Research Leader Bldg. 005, Room 306, BARC-West (main office);

2012 ADSA-AMPA-ASAS-CSAS-WSASAS joint annual meeting (1)Norman Comparison of daughter performance of New Zealand and North American sires in US herds H.D.

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,

2002 Paul M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Selection of dairy.

Impacts of inclusion of foreign data in genomic evaluation of dairy cattle K. M. Olson 1, P. M. VanRaden 2, D. J. Null 2, and M. E. Tooker 2 1 National.

2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD 2011 Avoiding bias from genomic pre- selection in converting.

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

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

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,

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

2003 G.R. Wiggans,* P.M. VanRaden, and J.L. Edwards Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

WiggansBritish Cattle Conference 2015 (1) Dr. George R. Wiggans Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,

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.

2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Lab, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA 2009 Mixing Different SNP Densities Mixing Different.

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

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

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*,

2007 Paul VanRaden, George Wiggans, Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Curt Van Tassell, Tad Sonstegard, Bovine Functional Genomics Laboratory USDA.

2007 Paul VanRaden and Jan Wright Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD 2013 Measuring genomic pre-selection in theory.

Paul VanRaden, 1 Katie Olson, 2 Dan Null, 1 Mehdi Sargolzaei, 3 Marco Winters, 4 and Jan-Thijs van Kaam 5 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, ARS,

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

2007 Paul VanRaden, Melvin Tooker*, George Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory 2009 Can you believe those genomic.

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

Wiggans, 2014ASAS-ADSA-CSAS Joint Annual Meeting (1) G.R. Wiggans* 1, T.A. Cooper 1, P.M. VanRaden 1, D.J. Null 1, J.L. Hutchison 1, O.M. Meland 2, M.E.

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2008 AIPL Centennial.

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

George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Select Sires’

2007 Paul VanRaden and Melvin Tooker* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory 2010 Gains in reliability from combining subsets.

2007 Paul VanRaden 1, Jeff O’Connell 2, George Wiggans 1, Kent Weigel 3 1 Animal Improvement Programs Lab, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA 2 University of Maryland.

Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2004 NAAB Update : Base Change, Udder Health, Longevity,

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.

Multibreed Genomic Evaluation Using Purebred Dairy Cattle K. M. Olson* 1 and P. M. VanRaden 2 1 Department of Dairy Science Virginia Polytechnic and State.

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

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

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,

Effects of dam’s dry period length on heifer development H. D. Norman and J. L. Hutchison* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research.

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.

G.R. Wiggans 1, T. A. Cooper 1 *, K.M. Olson 2 and P.M. VanRaden 1 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville,

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

Multibreed Genomic Evaluations in Purebred Dairy Cattle K. M. Olson 1 and P. M. VanRaden 2 1 National Association of Animal Breeders 2 AIPL, ARS, USDA.

Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA Inbreeding Adjustments and Effect on Genetic Trend.

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

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.

Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2014 Paul VanRaden Advancing.

2007 Paul VanRaden, Jan Wright, Gary Fok, and Mel Tooker Animal Genomics and Improvement Lab Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD, USA

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD G.R. WiggansCouncil.

2005 P.M. VanRaden and M.E. Tooker* Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Effect.

How selection for better health impacts dairy profitability

Improving production efficiency through genetic selection

Validation of genomic predictions and genomic reliability

Can you believe those genomic evaluations for young bulls?

Percent of total breedings

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

Using Haplotypes in Breeding Programs

How selection for better health impacts dairy profitability

Presentation transcript:

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(1) T.A. Cooper, G.R. Wiggans and P.M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Analysis of Genomic Predictor Population

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(2) Objectives l Evaluate the accuracy of cow and bull traditional information in the genomic evaluation system for Holstein l How useful are cows? l Would more old bulls increase accuracy? l What is the contribution of additional predictor animals?

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(3) Introduction l The number of females genotyped monthly has increased from approximately 1,800 per month in 2010 to 12,650 per month in l Only a few countries other than the US include cows in the reference population. Ex: Ireland, Australia and Czeck Republic l For bulls, efforts have been made to increase collaborations with many other organizations.

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(4) Number of Genotypes Added Monthly

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(5) Cut off study (Bulls vs. Cows) l Predictor Bulls – 21,883 l Predictor Cows – 30,852 l Traditional evaluation by August 2012 to predict animals that gained a traditional evaluation between August 2012 and December 2013 l Only females who were genotyped before they were two years old where included in the validation set to avoid selection bias

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(6) Bulls and/or Cows Predicting Bulls Gain Gen Rel Trait Validation Bulls (no.) Parent Average Cows Only Bulls OnlyBoth Milk Fat Protein PL SCS DPR − HCR − CCR Final score Average* Highest Gen Rel Gain *Excluding $NM

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(7) Gain Gen Rel Trait Validation Bulls (no.) Parent Average Cows Only Bulls OnlyBoth Milk Fat Protein PL35719− SCS DPR −1.1−0.8−0.6 HCR CCR Final score Average* Bulls and/or Cows Predicting Cows Highest Gen Rel Gain *Excluding $NM

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(8) Number predictor bulls by birth year

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(9) Cut off study (Age) l Predictor Bulls − All – 21,883 − Bulls born before 1996 removed – 17,047 − Bulls born before 2001 removed – 11,507 − Bulls born before 2005 removed – 6,623 l Traditional evaluation by August 2012 to predict animals that gained a traditional evaluation between August 2012 and December 2013

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(10) Bulls only excluded by birth year Gain Gen Rel Trait Validation Bulls (no.) Parent AverageAll Birth years included ≥1996≥2001≥2005 Milk Fat Protein PL SCS DPR HCR CCR Final score Average* Highest Gen Rel Gain *Excluding $NM

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(11) Random vs. birth year exclusion (Milk) Gain in genomic rel (Milk)

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(12) Conclusions l How useful are cows? − Cows contribute a small amount to genomic accuracy due to low reliabilities in the US. However, if bull genotypes are limited, they become more valuable. l Would more old bulls increase accuracy? − Historic bulls contribute a small amount to genomic accuracy due to linkage decay. Bulls closer in age to the young bulls offer more predictive ability. l What is the contribution of additional predictor animals? − We have not yet reached a plateau of gains in genomic reliability.

Cooper, 2014CDCB Meeting Aug. 5(13) Questions? Holstein and Jersey crossbreds graze on American Farm Land Trust’s Cove Mountain Farm in south-central Pennsylvania Source: ARS Image Gallery, image #K ; photo by Bob Nichols