2004 2005 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Considering.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

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

Advertisements

2006 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD USDA Genetic.

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.

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.

2003 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD USDA Dairy Goat.

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

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

Genetics in the Animal Industry A.Describe 2 types of selection B.Compare Phenotype and Genotype C.Define Common Terms used in genetics D.Describe the.

Genetic Selection Tools in the Genomics Era Curt Van Tassell, PhD Bovine Functional Genomics Laboratory & Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Beltsville,

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

2005 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD AIPL Projects.

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

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

How Genomics is changing Business and Services of Associations Dr. Josef Pott, Weser-Ems-Union eG, Germany.

What’s coming next in genomics? Ben Hayes, Department of Primary Industries, Victoria, Australia.

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

Mating Programs Including Genomic Relationships and Dominance Effects Chuanyu Sun 1, Paul M. VanRaden 2, Jeff R. O'Connell 3 1 National Association of.

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2010 G.R. WiggansDCRC.

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,*

Wiggans, 2013Japanese Genomics Tour (1) Dr. George R. WiggansDr. H. Duane Norman Acting Research LeaderInterim Administrator Animal Improvement Programs.

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.

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

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,

Bovine Genomics The Technology and its Applications Gerrit Kistemaker Chief Geneticist, Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) Many slides were created by.

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.

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2008 G.R. WiggansDHI-Provo.

2002 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD USDA Dairy Goat.

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.

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,

Factors affecting heifer fertility in U.S. Holsteins M. T. Kuhn* and J. L. Hutchison Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service,

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

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

XX International Grassland Conference 2005 (1) 2005 Genetic Alternatives for Dairy Producers who Practise Grazing H. D. Norman, J. R. Wright, R. L. Powell.

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

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

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

2005 George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Reproduction.

John B. Cole Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD What.

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.

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 George R. Wiggans and Curt P. Van Tassell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

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.

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

2007 John Cole, Paul VanRaden, George Wiggans, and Melvin Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD,

G.R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD G.R. WiggansADSA 18.

2006 GEORGE R. WIGGANS Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, Maryland ,

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,

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

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 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2011 G.R. Wiggans DNA.

H.D. NORMAN,* R.L. POWELL, J.R. WRIGHT

Distribution and Location of Genetic Effects for Dairy Traits

Genomic Evaluations.

Genomic Selection in Dairy Cattle

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.

Relationship of gestation length to stillbirth

Principles of Dairy Cattle Breeding

Presentation transcript:

George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Considering Inbreeding in Making Breeding Decisions

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (2)G. R. Wiggans What is inbreeding?  The likelihood that an animal inherits the same gene from each parent because the parents have ancestors in common

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (3)G. R. Wiggans Why is inbreeding important?  The higher the inbreeding, the more likely deleterious recessives will be expressed  Inbreeding depression = the resulting reduction in performance

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (4)G. R. Wiggans Inbreeding depression per 1% inbreeding Milk-65.3lbDPR-0.078% Fat-2.37lbSCS+0.003score Protein-2.14lbPL-0.2mo

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (5)G. R. Wiggans How inbreeding is used in calculation of PTA’s  Lactation records and relationship matrix are adjusted for inbreeding  Evaluations are adjusted for expected future inbreeding  Expected future inbreeding is half the relationship of the animal to 600 recent cows

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (6)G. R. Wiggans Benefits of AIPL procedure  Bull not penalized if daughters are inbred  Bulls docked if they are more highly related to potential mates than average

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (7)G. R. Wiggans Ten most highly related Holstein sires to cows in Aug 2005 inbreeding coefficient calculated to 1960 base NameBYRBull FPast FExp. F TO-MAR BLACKSTAR-ET ROUND OAK RAG APPLE ELEVATION PAWNEE FARM ARLINDA CHIEF MJR BLACKSTAR EMORY-ET WA-DEL RC MATT-ET CAL-CLARK BOARD CHAIRMAN KED JUROR-ET S-W-D VALIANT RICECREST EMERSON-ET WALKWAY CHIEF MARK

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (8)G. R. Wiggans Limitation of AIPL procedure  PTA is not adjusted for the bull’s relationship to a particular mate

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (9)G. R. Wiggans What can be done about inbreeding?  When breeding a cow, use an unrelated sire  Progeny of a highly inbred cow will not be inbred if she and the mating sire have no common ancestors

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (10)G. R. Wiggans Is this practical?  Usually, no  Intensive selection has led to rising levels of inbreeding  Popular sires are likely to be related to many cows

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (11)G. R. Wiggans Holstein Inbreeding

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (12)G. R. Wiggans What are mating programs?  Computer programs that recommend a service sire for a cow  The more pedigree data they have, the better recommendations they can make  Use of a mate that will cause higher inbreeding in the calf is justified if the superiority in PTA exceeds the additional inbreeding depression

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (13)G. R. Wiggans Examples of mating programs  Holstein Inbreeding Calculator  Jersey-Mate  Stud programs

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (14)G. R. Wiggans Crossbreeding  Mating parents of different breeds  Provides relief from inbreeding  Heterosis – superiority over the average of the parents

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (15)G. R. Wiggans Average heterosis value Milk+700lbDPR+1.8% Fat+35lbSCS+0.02score Protein+26lbPL+0.3mo

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (16)G. R. Wiggans Crossbreds in genetic evaluations  Methods to include records of crossbreds are being developed  All breeds can be included in the same evaluation  Requires pedigree of crossbreds including parental breed  On farm software may choke on:  Norwegian Red  Montbéliard  Ranking depends on breed of mate

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (17)G. R. Wiggans Conclusions  Inbreeding reduces productivity  Semen should be allocated to minimize the inbreeding of progeny  Mating programs can be profitable  Crossbreeding gives heterosis (relief from inbreeding depression)  Genetic evaluations that include crossbreds are coming

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (18)G. R. Wiggans Other research at AIPL  Evaluations for:  Stillbirth  Male fertility  Persistency  Disease resistance  Change in PL to credit longer lactations  Detecting abnormal distributions of calving ease scores

CONSIDERING INBREEDING (19)G. R. Wiggans Other research at AIPL (Cont)  Parentage verification based on Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP)  Determine the rate of parentage errors  Using SNP to trace inheritance of chromosomal segments  Potential to greatly increase accuracy of parent average