| Literature DB >> 22475575 |
Jessica Franzén1, Daniel Thorburn, Jorge I Urioste, Erling Strandberg.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many methods for the genetic analysis of mastitis use a cross-sectional approach, which omits information on, e.g., repeated mastitis cases during lactation, somatic cell count fluctuations, and recovery process. Acknowledging the dynamic behavior of mastitis during lactation and taking into account that there is more than one binary response variable to consider, can enhance the genetic evaluation of mastitis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22475575 PMCID: PMC3384242 DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-44-10
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genet Sel Evol ISSN: 0999-193X Impact factor: 4.297
Average values for the two mastitis frequency scenarios
| Scenario 1 | Scenario 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Mastitis lactation (%) | 16.5 | 40.0 |
| 2. Mastitis cases per lactation | 0.28 | 0.95 |
| 3. Mastitis cases per affected lactation | 1.50 | 2.40 |
1. Percent of lactations with at least one case of clinical mastitis; 2. Total number of cases/total number of lactations; 3. Total number of cases/total number of lactations with at least one case of clinical mastitis
Average correlations between true and estimated breeding values
| Daughters/sire | 60 | 150 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (0.012) | (0.018) | (0.012) | (0.021) | (0.009) | (0.016) | (0.005) | (0.013) | ||
| Cows | 24000 | 4149 | 24000 | 10151 | 60000 | 10374 | 60000 | 25450 | |
| Herds | 1200 | 1095 | 1200 | 1197 | 1200 | 1187 | 1200 | 1200 | |
| (0.007) | (0.013) | (0.012) | (0.018) | (0.009) | (0.012) | (0.005) | (0.006) | ||
| Cows | 24000 | 4128 | 24000 | 10139 | 60000 | 10328 | 60000 | 25411 | |
| Herds | 1200 | 1092 | 1200 | 1197 | 1200 | 1186 | 1200 | 1200 | |
| 0.0148 | (0.015) | 0.0108 | (0.014) | (0.013) | (0.028) | (0.007) | (0.016) | ||
| Cows | 24000 | 4131 | 24000 | 10161 | 60000 | 10366 | 60000 | 25453 | |
| Herds | 1200 | 1094 | 1200 | 1198 | 1200 | 1184 | 1200 | 1200 | |
| (0.013) | (0.012) | (0.011) | (0.016) | (0.013) | (0.021) | (0.006) | (0.010) | ||
| Cows | 24000 | 4115 | 24000 | 10148 | 60000 | 10322 | 60000 | 25425 | |
| Herds | 1200 | 1093 | 1200 | 1197 | 1200 | 1183 | 1200 | 1200 | |
| (0.017) | (0.019) | (0.013) | (0.021) | (0.011) | (0.021) | (0.015) | (0.012) | ||
| Cows | 24000 | 4136 | 24000 | 10189 | 60000 | 10423 | 60000 | 25428 | |
| Herds | 1200 | 1087 | 1200 | 1123 | 1200 | 1187 | 1200 | 1200 | |
| (0.016) | (0.019) | (0.011) | (0.013) | (0.010) | (0.045) | (0.014) | (0.011) | ||
| Cows | 24000 | 4118 | 24000 | 10176 | 60000 | 10408 | 60000 | 25396 | |
| Herds | 1200 | 1084 | 1200 | 1195 | 1200 | 1187 | 1200 | 1200 | |
Correlations (in bold) between true and estimated breeding values in the healthy to diseased (HD) and diseased to healthy (DH) directions ( and ) for different combinations of genetic correlation (r), daughters per sire, mastitis frequency, and boundary level (B(τ)); the number of cows and herds used for each correlation are also reported; reported values in the table are the mean and standard errors (within parentheses) based on five replicates
Average correlations between estimated breeding values in the HD and DH direction
| Daughters/sire | 60 | 150 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Correlations (in bold) between estimated breeding values in the healthy to diseased direction and the diseased to healthy direction for different combinations of genetic correlation (r), daughters per sire, mastitis frequency, and boundary level (B(τ)). Reported values in the table are the mean and standard errors (within parentheses) based on five replicates