How Does Additional Information Impact Accuracy? Dan W. Moser Department of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University, Manhattan

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Livestock Improvement through Selection
Advertisements

Selection For Carcass Marbling and Muscling-- Benefits and Pitfalls Jim Gosey University of Nebraska.
West Virginia University Extension Service Genetics in Beef Cattle Wayne R. Wagner.
Matt Spangler University of Nebraska- Lincoln DEVELOPMENT OF GENOMIC EPD: EXPANDING TO MULTIPLE BREEDS IN MULTIPLE WAYS.
Carcass EPD: Where are we, and where are we going? Dan W. Moser Dept. of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University.
Making the Web equal Profit Surfing for Genetics Dorian Garrick & Mark Enns Department of Animal Sciences Colorado State University.
Colorado Agriscience Curriculum
BEEF GENETICS NEXT What color are Shorthorns? n A. White n B. Red n C. Roan n D. All the above A B C D NEXT.
BEEF CATTLE GENETICS By David R. Hawkins Michigan State University.
EPD 101 PredictingProfit… Red Angus – EPD 101. EPD 101 Members (Seedstock producers) succeed through enabling the success (profit) of their commercial.
Principles of Livestock Judging University of Florida H/FFA Livestock Judging Clinic Full presentation online at
Matt Spangler Beef Genetics Specialist University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Breeding and Genetics 101.
Van Eenennaam 11/17/2010 Animal Genomics and Biotechnology Education Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D. Cooperative Extension Specialist Animal Biotechnology.
Jared E. Decker 1.
Breed and Trait Selection Considerations Dan W. Moser Dept. of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University.
Economically Relevant Traits Mark Enns Colorado State University.
Straightbreeding – A simple way to reduce your bottomline D. A. Daley California State University, Chico NCBCEC Brown Bagger Session October 17, 2012.
Using EPDs in Selection Stolen and edited by: Brandon Freel and Daniel Powell Originally compiled by Colorado Agriscience Curriculum.
Designing Genetics and Selection for Seedstock Breeders, Commercial Cattlemen and Show Ring Enthusiasts ASA Fall Focus 2015: Confidence Builds Success.
WHAT ARE EPD’S?. What is an EPD? E-xpected P-rogeny D-ifference A measure of the degree of difference between the progeny of the bull and the progeny.
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.
Brown Bagger – Beef Cattle Genetics: Fine Tuning Selection Decisions 1 How Do I Decide What Traits are Important? Carcass/Ultrasound EPDs Bob Weaber GRA-Cornell.
Brown Bagger – Beef Cattle Genetics: Fine Tuning Selection Decisions 1 How do I decide what traits are important ? Selection Indices Dorian Garrick Department.
Genomics. Finding True Genetic Merit 2 Dam EPD Sire EPD Pedigree Estimate EPD TRUE Progeny Difference Mendelian Sampling Effect Adapted from Dr. Bob Weaber.
Introduction to Selection Indexes Bob Weaber, Ph.D. State Extension Specialist-Beef Genetics University of Missouri-Columbia
Animal Genomics and Biotechnology Education “Economic value of genomic information: Sire and commercial heifer selection" Van Eenennaam 10/19/2011.
B66 Heritability, EPDs & Performance Data. Infovets Educational Resources – – Slide 2 Heritability  Heritability is the measurement.
The Many Measures of Accuracy: How Are They Related? Matt Spangler, Ph.D. University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Identifying Genetic Antagonisms Megan Rolf Oklahoma State University.
ACROSS BREED EPD TABLES FOR THE YEAR 2006 ADJUSTED TO THE BIRTH YEAR OF 2004 L. Dale Van Vleck and Larry V. Cundiff MARC-ARS-USDA Lincoln and Clay Center,
Selection of Breeding Program An S 426 Fall 2007.
Evaluating Longevity: 10 Years of Using Stayability EPD Larry Keenan Research & Special Projects Coordinator, RAAA.
 Objective 7.03: Apply the Use of Production Records.
Genetic Evaluation of Carcass Data Using Age, Weight, Fat, or Marbling Endpoints 2003 BIF Selection Decisions Committee May 29, 2003 Janice M. Rumph Montana.
Understanding Cattle Data Professor N. Nelson Blue Mountain Agriculture College.
Nuts and Bolts of Genetic Improvement Genetic Model Predicting Genetic Levels Increase Commercial Profitability Lauren Hyde Jackie Atkins Wade Shafer Fall.
Session 4 – Part 1 Status update on genomically enhanced genetic evaluation by breeds Dr. Matt Spangler, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Fitting Together the Pieces of the Feed Efficiency Puzzle: IGF-I as a biomarker or indicator trait for RFI Gordon Carstens Texas A&M University NBCEC Working.
Breeding Objectives for Terminal Sires Michael MacNeil USDA ARS Miles City, MT.
2002 George R. Wiggans and Curt P. Van Tassell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD
What is an EPD? Expected Progeny Difference
Feed Efficiency Genetic Projects. Terms Gain/Feed = Feed Efficiency FE Feed/Gain = Feed Conversion FC: -FE Residual Feed Intake RFI Net Feed Intake NFI:-RFI.
National Beef Cattle Evaluation Consortium Brown Bagger Seminar Carcass EPDs Integrating Carcass and Ultrasound October 22, 2008 Sally L. Northcutt Genetic.
Advanced Animal Breeding
Genetics – Trait Selection An S 426 Fall Genetics – Trait Selection Has led to development of Economically Relevant Traits (ERT) and Indicator Trait.
Jack Ward American Hereford Association October 31, 2012.
Principles of Agricultural Science – Animal 1. 2 Expected Progeny Differences Principles of Agricultural Science – Animal Unit 7 – Lesson 7.2 Predicting.
Using EPDs in Selection Edited by: Jessica Hawley & Brandon Freel Originally compiled by Colorado Agriscience Curriculum.
 Genes- located on chromosomes, control characteristics that are inherited from parents.  Allele- an alternative form of a gene (one member.
Evaluation & Use of Expected Progeny Differences in Beef Cattle Dr. Fred Rayfield Livestock Specialist Georgia Agricultural Education To accompany lesson.
Gene350 Animal Genetics Lecture September 2009.
Bull Selection: Beef Kay Farmer Madison County High School edited by Billy Moss and Rachel Postin July 2001.
Sustainable Agriculture
Fundamentals of the Eurostar evaluations
Selection and Judging of Beef Cattle
Evaluation & Use of Expected Progeny Differences in Beef Cattle
Using EPDs in Selection
DNA Technology.
Update on Multi-Breed Genetic Evaluation
WHAT ARE EPD’s?.
Have Phenotypic Trends for Carcass Traits Followed Genetic Trends?
Selection Tools for Beef Cattle Improvement
Using EPDs in Selection
Genetic evaluation of an index of birth weight and yearling weight
Use of a threshold animal model to estimate calving ease and stillbirth (co)variance components for US Holsteins.
History of Selection From Phenotypes to Economic Indexes
Expected Progeny Differences
Expected Progeny Difference EPD
Presentation transcript:

How Does Additional Information Impact Accuracy? Dan W. Moser Department of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University, Manhattan

Additional Information Start with a pedigree, possibly a phenotype Add: –Phenotype for a correlated indicator trait –Progeny test data –DNA test results How much is accuracy of selection increased by adding each piece of additional information?

What Drives Genetic Change? Bourdon, 2000

What Drives Genetic Change? Accuracy of Selection Generation Interval Genetic Variation Intensity of Selection

Rate of Genetic Change Additional information –Should increase accuracy –May increase generation interval –May reduce intensity of selection If only certain animals have additional info

It Often Comes Down To: Is the value of the additional information worth the time and cost required to get it? Is the additional information available on enough animals to maintain selection intensity?

Correlated Traits Birth Weight as a predictor of Calving Ease –Because Calving Ease is a binary trait (yes/no), having a correlated continuous indicator trait can add considerable accuracy to selection

Correlated Traits Calf CEUUUUUUAA BW CE: U = Unassisted, A = Assisted

Unmeasured ERT ERT = Economically relevant trait When ERT is unmeasured, the genetic relationship between the ERT and the indicator trait must be strong Otherwise accuracy of selection for the ERT using only the indicator is low

Accuracy of Correlated Selection Acc (ERT selection) = Acc (Indicator EPD) x r G btw ERT and Indicator Where Acc is true accuracy, not BIF accuracy

Example: Ultrasound Use live-animal ultrasound measurement as an indicator of carcass merit Assume genetic correlation btw yearling bull ultrasound and steer carcass is 0.70 If a bull has an ultrasound EPD with accuracy of 0.90, what is the accuracy of selection for carcass?

Example: Ultrasound If the 0.90 accuracy is “true” accuracy, then the “true” accuracy of selection is: 0.90 x 0.70 = 0.63 But “BIF” accuracy would be quite different:

BIF Accuracy (BIF) Accuracy of IMF EPD True Accuracy of Selection for IMF Genetic correlation between IMF and MARB 0.70 True Accuracy of Selection for Marbling (BIF) Accuracy of Selection for Marbling

Bottom Line BIF accuracy understates the true accuracy of selection Selection on indicator traits only is significantly less accurate unless the genetic correlation is very high

Progeny Test How much additional accuracy is added by a progeny test, assuming the animal is phenotyped? –Depends on the heritability of the trait –Depends on the number of progeny –Depends (a little) on how much pedigree information is available on the animal

Progeny Test Example BIF accuracy values, calculated from Selection Index Individual record on animal 10 or 200 Paternal half-sibs 0, 5, 50 or 500 progeny Heritability of 0.05, 0.25 or 0.45

Progeny Test Example BIF Accuracy PHSh2h2 No Prog 5 Prog 50 Prog 500 Prog

Progeny Test Example Progeny data add accuracy, regardless of heritability Pedigree adds relatively little accuracy especially when significant numbers of progeny are evaluated

Adding Molecular Information Van Eenennaam (2010) showed that if molecular breeding values (MBV) explained all of the genetic variation for a trait, the increase in genetic gain from MAS would be substantial No products currently on the market have been shown to explain a majority of the variation for a quantitative trait

Adding Molecular Information MacNeil et al. (2010) compared the use of ultrasound measurements and MBV for prediction of carcass marbling BV in Angus cattle Genetic correlation between ultrasound IMF and carcass marbling was 0.56, and 0.38 between MBV and carcass marbling

Adding Molecular Information Despite the lower genetic correlation, the authors expected greater genetic gain from selection on MBV than on ultrasound, because MBV are fully heritable Ultrasound values on sibs provide significantly increased genetic gain, but MBV on sibs does not

Adding Molecular Information Authors concluded that a very limited amount of progeny carcass data would be more informative than either MBV or ultrasound MBV selection is more useful for traits that are difficult to measure, or that are measured later in life

Summary Accuracy of indicator trait EPD does not reflect accuracy of selection for ERT Progeny records add significant information, but adds both expense and time to evaluations Molecular breeding values could be a very useful tool for selection, if the tests explain larger portions of the variation in a trait.