1 / 24

Can you believe those genomic evaluations for young bulls?

This study analyzes genomic evaluations for young bulls in North America from 2008 to 2009, comparing reliability gains, yield traits, health and type traits, and the adoption of genomic testing. The results show that young bulls have higher net merit and closer correlations with later data compared to proven bulls from 2004.

williammurphy
Download Presentation

Can you believe those genomic evaluations for young bulls?

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. Can you believe those genomic evaluations for young bulls?

  2. Proven Bulls or Young Bulls?

  3. Genotyped Animals (n=6,005)In North America as of April 2008

  4. Genotyped Animals (n=19,464)In North America as of December 2008

  5. Genotyped Animals (n=29,313)In North America as of June 2009

  6. Reliability TestHolstein, Jersey, and Brown Swiss breeds Data from 2004 used to predict independent data from 2009

  7. Reliability Gain1 by BreedYield traits and NM$ of young bulls 1Gain above parent average reliability ~35%

  8. Reliability Gain by BreedHealth and type traits of young bulls

  9. Adoption of Genomic TestingUS young bulls with NAAB codes, Apr 2009 * 2007-2008 counts are incomplete

  10. Genomic Tested BullsAvailable Apr 2009

  11. Young vs. Old Bull Test • Genomic PTAs computed from Nov 2004 data • Select top 20 young and old bulls for genomic or traditional NM$ • Predict Jan 2009 daughter merit • Remove direct contribution of PA (similar to DYD) • Compare regressions and bias (adjusting for 2005 base change)

  12. Net Merit of Top 20 Bulls from 2009 data based on selection in 2004

  13. Changes in Net Merit means for top 20 bulls (2009 – 2004)

  14. Net Merit regressions Predict 2009 from 2004 data, expected = 1.00

  15. Average regressions across all traits Predict 2009 from 2004 data, expected = 1.00

  16. Genomic vs. Traditional • Examine traditional and genomic trends for two traits: • Net Merit • Protein • Data from February 2009

  17. Genomic vs. traditional – protein PTA

  18. Genomic vs. traditional – net merit

  19. Genomic vs. trad. – protein reliability

  20. Genomic vs. trad. – net merit reliability

  21. Reliability frequency

  22. Conclusions • Almost all new bulls and majority of in-waiting bulls are genotyped • Genomic PTAs have • Less bias than parent averages • Regressions closer to 1.0 • Higher correlations with later data • Higher Net Merit for top 20 young bulls than proven bulls from 2004

  23. Acknowledgments • Genotyping and DNA extraction: • USDA Bovine Functional Genomics Lab, U. Missouri, U. Alberta, GeneSeek, Genetics & IVF Institute, Genetic Visions, and Illumina • Computing: • AIPL staff (Leigh Walton, Jay Megonigal) • Funding: • National Research Initiative grants • 2006-35205-16888, 2006-35205-16701 • Agriculture Research Service • Holstein, Jersey and Brown Swiss breed associations • Contributors to Cooperative Dairy DNA Repository (CDDR)

  24. CDDR Contributors • National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB, Columbia, MO) • ABS Global (DeForest, WI) • Accelerated Genetics (Baraboo, WI) • Alta (Balzac, AB, Canada) • Genex (Shawano, WI) • New Generation Genetics (Fort Atkinson, WI) • Select Sires (Plain City, OH) • Semex Alliance (Guelph, ON, Canada) • Taurus-Service (Mehoopany, PA)

More Related