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.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Multi-Breed Genetic Evaluations Lessons from UK Dairy evaluations Marco Winters.

Advertisements

2001 PLACE, DATE (1) Cow Fertility and Effect on Longevity PAUL VANRADEN Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,

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.

George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD 2008 Genetic trends.

Breed composition of the United States dairy cattle herd R. L. Powell,* H. D. Norman, and J. L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural.

ADSA 2002 (HDN-P1) 2002 Comparison of occurrence and yields of daughters of progeny-test and proven bulls in artificial insemination and natural- service.

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

December 2014 Proof Changes

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

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

2007 ADSA 2007 (1)H.D. Norman Effect of service sire and cow sire on gestation length H.D. Norman,* J.R. Wright, P.M. VanRaden, and J.B. Cole Animal Improvement.

 PTA mobility was highly correlated with udder composite.  PTA mobility showed a moderate, positive correlation with production, productive life, and.

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,

2002 ADSA 2002 (HDN-1) H.D. NORMAN* ( ), R.H. MILLER, P.M. V AN RADEN, and J.R. WRIGHT Animal Improvement Programs.

Norway (1) 2005 Status of Dairy Cattle Breeding in the United States Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service,

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

Breed Composition Codes for Crossbred Dairy Cattle in the United States John B. Cole,* Melvin E. Tooker, Paul M. VanRaden, and Joel H. Megonigal, Jr. Animal.

AFGC Convention 2004 (1) 2004 Possibilities for Improving Dairy Cattle Performance Dr. H. Duane Norman Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.

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,

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.

Paul VanRaden USDA Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville, MD, USA 2004 Choice of Scales for Delivery of Genetic Evaluations.

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

2007 Paul VanRaden, Mel Tooker, and Melvin Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA

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

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2009 G.R. WiggansInner.

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.

2005 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD An Example from Dairy.

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,

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

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

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

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

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 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.

7 th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod Selection of dairy cattle for lifetime profit Paul M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory.

Dr. George R. Wiggans, Ph.D. Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD, USA

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

Norman, 2014ICAR / Interbull annual meeting, Berlin, Germany, May 20, 2014 (1) Dr. H. Duane Norman Interim Administrator Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding.

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

Adjustment of breeding values for past and future inbreeding Paul VanRaden*, Lori Smith Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service,

P. M. VanRaden and T. A. Cooper * Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA

H.D. Norman, J.R. Wright, and R.H. Miller Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA

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.

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.

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,

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.

2002 Paul M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Extreme Inbreeding.

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

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.

2004 P.M. VanRaden, M.E. Tooker*, and J.B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

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

C.P. Van Tassell 1, * G.R. Wiggans 1, J.C. Philpot 1, and I. Misztal Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA,

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

2001 NAAB / S-284 Meeting, Baltimore, 2001 (1) Implications of Crossbreeding on Dairy Cattle Improvement Paul VanRaden and Ashley Sanders Animal Improvement.

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

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

2001 ASAS/ADSA 2001 Conference (1) Simultaneous accounting for heterogeneity of (co)variance components in genetic evaluation of type traits N. Gengler.

Cross-Breeding What is X-Breeding?.

Percent of total breedings

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.

Presentation transcript:

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 Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (2) From , M.H. Fohrman studied 113 Guernsey, Jersey, Holstein, and Red Danes crosses at Beltsville. Another study of 137 Ayrshire, Brown Swiss and Holstein crosses was conducted from (McDowell and McDaniel, 1968). USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947 Holstein  Guernsey

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (3) 12, Crossbreds averaged 12,904 pounds of milk and 588 pounds of butterfat, outperforming dams by more than sire proof predictions (Fohrman,1947). 13, In 1945, advanced register Holsteins averaged 13,833 pounds of milk and 493 pounds of fat. USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947 Red Dane  Jersey

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (4) Breeds Are Evaluated Separately  Separate data sets reduce bias in evaluations within breeds, but provide:  No evaluations for crossbreds  No method to compare cows across breeds  New Zealand, Australia, and the Netherlands include crossbreds and account for heterosis in evaluations.  USDA-DHIA evaluations exclude crossbred cows unless identified as part of a “grading-up” program.

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (5) Objectives  Document the number and type of crossbred cows in the US.  Estimate heterosis and breed differences using cows of different breed composition competing in the same herd.  Compare the economic merit of crossbred and purebred cows.

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (6) Traits Considered  Milk, fat, and protein yields  Somatic cell score (SCS)  Productive life (PL)  Linear type composites not available  Body size estimates obtained from literature  Udder and leg trait estimates assumed zero  Net merit, cheese merit, fluid merit calculated  Adjusted to Holstein scale  Fertility, mortality, and calving ease not available

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (7) Yield Traits & SCS Data  Data were from the national test-day database available May,  572 herds each with at least 5 crossbred cows  10,442 crossbred cows born since 1990  140,421 purebred herdmates (80% were Holstein)  Crossbreds defined by sire breed and maternal grandparent breeds.  Sires were purebred, dam breed used for unknown maternal grandparent breed  XX (crossbred) not accepted for maternal grandparents  Holstein and Red & White considered one breed

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (8) Yield Traits & SCS Edits  85% of tests included fat, 82% protein, and 73% SCS  Edits applied:  Lactation length at least 250 days  At least 5 milk tests required before day 305  Sire PTA was obtained to account for possible differences in selection intensity of purebreds vs. crossbreds.

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (9) Yield Traits & SCS Models Yield Traits & SCS Models  The models included effects of:  Herd-year-season  Age  Stage of lactation  Regression on sire PTA  Interaction of sire breed and maternal grand-parent breeds  Individual 3-breed interactions were weighted by number of observations to obtain:  Specific and general heterosis  General recombination effect

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (10) Number of F 1 & Purebred Cows Number of F 1 & Purebred Cows In Mixed Breed Contemporary Groups Sire Breed Dam Breed Ayrshire Brown Swiss GuernseyJersey Milking Shorthorn Holstein Ayrshire 933— Brown Swiss — Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn —111— Holstein ,836

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (11) Number of F 1 & Backcross Cows Number of F 1 & Backcross Cows With Holstein Sire or Grandparent Holstein Genes Second Breed 25% 25% 50% 50% 75% 75% Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (12) Productive Life Data  Data from the national database available July, 1994  41,131 crossbred cows born from 1960 through 1991  726,344 purebred cows in the same herd-years  Breed composition from five generation pedigrees  Percent genes from each breed  Progeny breed = mean of parents’ breeds  Unknown parent breed = progeny breed  Breed ‘XX’ progeny with unknown parents excluded  Holstein and Red & White considered one breed

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (13) Productive Life Models  Model 1 included effects of:  Herd-year-season  Regressions on breed composition  Regression on coefficient of heterosis  Incomplete records weighted by age  Model 2 also included:  Interaction of birth year with breed composition  Interaction of birth year with heterosis

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (14) Results  Estimated breed means  Estimates of heterosis  Economic comparisons  Rank other breeds on Holstein base  Some new crossbreeding theory

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (15) Breed Effects for Yield Traits Calculated from Holstein Means BreedMilk(kg/d)Fat(kg/d)Protein(kg/d) Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn Holstein

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (16) USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947 Holstein  Jersey Cow #Pounds of Milk% Butterfat Pounds of Butterfat X-513, X-1112, X-2012, X-3011, X-3811, X-4013, X-5113, All cows sired by Beltsville Holstein No. 966

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (17) USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947 Jersey  Holstein Cow #Pounds of Milk% Butterfat Pounds of Butterfat X-1 9, X-313, X-1713, X-3213, X-4112, X-42 9, X-4712, X-1 and X-47 were sired by an unidentified Jersey sire. All others sired by Beltsville Jersey No. 1114

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (18) Heterosis for Yield Traits Heterosis for Yield Traits Percent of Parent Breed Average MilkFatProtein Breed Holstein Sire Holstein Dam Holstein Sire Holstein Dam Holstein Sire Holstein Dam Ayrshire  Brown Swiss  Guernsey  Jersey  M. Shorthorn  Heterosis 3.4 (SE=0.3) 4.4 (SE=0.4) 4.1 (SE=0.4)

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (19) Breed Effects & Heterosis for SCS Breed Mean SCS % Heterosis for Holstein  Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn Holstein — Heterosis 0.72 % (unfavorable) (SE=0.9)

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (20) Breed Effects & Heterosis for PL Breed PL (mo) 1990 births 1995 Base Change (mo) PL (mo) 1995 births Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn Holstein Heterosis 1.2% (SE=0.1)

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (21) Breed Effects & Heterosis for Body Size & Size Composite Breed Mature Size (kg) Size Composite (BV) Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn Holstein Heterosis 3.0 % (Lopez-Villalobos, 1998)

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (22) Breed Differences & Heterosis for Economic Merit Breed Net Merit ($) Cheese Merit ($) Fluid Merit ($) Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn Holstein——— Heterosis$197$207$163

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (23) Merit of F 1 Holstein Crossbreds Second Breed Net Merit ($) Cheese Fluid Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey Jersey M. Shorthorn Compared to 2000 genetic base for Holstein

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (24) Mates for Holstein Cows Brown Swiss Jersey Top US Sire Ransom Fan Club NM$ (breed scale) $519 $519 $467 $467 Breed Difference (from HOL) - $178 - $153 Heterosis (NM$) + $197 + $197 + $197 Adjusted NM$ (HOL scale) $538 $538 $511 $511 NM$ Rank (HOL scale) CM$ Rank (HOL scale)

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (25) Protein kg/d % Holstein genes 0.86 — Holstein mean Crossbreeding Theory Holstein  Brown Swiss Protein Yield —A+Dominance (D) max heterosis (H) max heterosis (H) — A+D min H — A+D+A  A max H — A+D+A  A min H — Additive (A) only

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (26) Heterosis and Inbreeding  Animals become more related within but not across breeds.  Inbreeding rises by 2 to 3% per decade.  Crossbreeding removes accumulated inbreeding depression.  Heterosis for yield should increase by 0.6 to 0.9% per decade.

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (27) Conclusions

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (28) Conclusions  Currently < 0.5% of DHI cows are crossbred.  Heterosis was about 4% for yield traits, < 1% (unfavorable) for SCS, and 1% for PL.  Profit from Jersey  Holstein and Brown Swiss  Holstein crosses is higher than from Holsteins.  Fewer extreme bulls are found in minor breeds.  Backcross yields were higher than expected.

Paul VanRaden 2001 ADSA Indianapolis 2001 (29) Butterfat yield of three breed crosses was greater than from their F 1 crossbred dams. 14, Three breed crosses averaged 14,927 pounds of milk and 641 pounds of butterfat as 2-year-olds in USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947 Three-Breed Crosses