1 / 12

Choice of Scales for Delivery of Genetic Evaluations to the Public

Choice of Scales for Delivery of Genetic Evaluations to the Public. Can We Harmonize Trait Scales?. International marketing and education is difficult because scales differ Advertisements cross national borders

maree
Download Presentation

Choice of Scales for Delivery of Genetic Evaluations to the Public

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Choice of Scales for Delivery of Genetic Evaluations to the Public

  2. Can We Harmonize Trait Scales? • International marketing and education is difficult because scales differ • Advertisements cross national borders • 9 of 19 full-page bull advertisements contained only pictures, no numbers! (Holstein International, March, 2004) • Internet sites provide foreign evaluations • Joint data analyses could produce evaluations on a common scale

  3. Time to Change Bases • Every 5 years (2005, cows born in 2000) • 18 of 25 countries: AUS, BEL, CZE, DEU, ESP, EST, GBR, HUN, IRL, ISR, ITA, JPN, NLD, NZL, POL, SVN, USA, ZAF • At beginning of year? • Every year • 6 countries: CAN, CHE, FIN, FRA, NOR, SWE • At beginning of year except FRA=June • Each evaluation • 1 country: DNK

  4. Previous USA Base Changes

  5. Possible Things To Do • Change mean and variance base • Change units and/or direction • Change evaluation models • Put different breeds on the same base • Submit to the Interbull test run • Prepare educational materials

  6. Somatic Cell Count • Measured with same standard metric unit (cells / ml) in every country • Transformed by log 2, log 10, or log e • Reversed scales in 9 of 19 countries • Added means of 100, 3, 4, etc. • Changed SD to report EBV, PTA, or STA Different choice in almost every country!

  7. Udder Health Scales

  8. Longevity Scales

  9. Yield Trait Scales • True protein in 5 of 21 countries: • AUS, FRA, HUN, POL, USA (as of 2000) • True% = Crude% —.19 (e.g. 3.00% vs 3.19%) • Protein yield (kg) reduced by 5 - 6% • Age-parity adjustments differ • 16 of 25 countries adjust to average parity • 5 adjust to mature, 4 adjust to 1st parity • Separate lactation proofs available • 2 scales (RBV and EBV) seems too much

  10. Conformation Scales • Standardized Genetic Merit (PTA  SD) • Mean = 0, SD = 1 • 9of 21 countries: CHE, CZE, DNK, FRA, HUN, GBR, ITA, JPN, USA • Relative Breeding Values • Mean = 100, SD = 4, 7, 10, 12 • 8 countries in northern Europe • PTA, EBV, or other (4 countries)

  11. Selection Index Scales • Units and SD not well documented • Top bull for total merit (February ‘04) • DNK 114, DEU 145, AUS 162, FRA 179 • NZL 246, NLD 366, GBR 826 • USA 857 (NM), USA 1918 (TPI) • ESP 2148, CAN 2360, ITA 2944 • Ranking on home scale may include traits not evaluated by Interbull

  12. Conclusions • Base and scale changes go together • Many countries plan to change in Feb 2005 • Too many different scales cause confusion • Direction of udder health / SCS unclear • Recommended scales may help • Only 3 months until September test run

More Related