Literature DB >> 26254533

Hot topic: Definition and implementation of a breeding value for feed efficiency in dairy cows.

J E Pryce1, O Gonzalez-Recio2, G Nieuwhof3, W J Wales4, M P Coffey5, B J Hayes6, M E Goddard7.   

Abstract

A new breeding value that combines the amount of feed saved through improved metabolic efficiency with predicted maintenance requirements is described. The breeding value includes a genomic component for residual feed intake (RFI) combined with maintenance requirements calculated from either a genomic or pedigree estimated breeding value (EBV) for body weight (BW) predicted using conformation traits. Residual feed intake is only available for genotyped Holsteins; however, BW is available for all breeds. The RFI component of the "feed saved" EBV has 2 parts: Australian calf RFI and Australian lactating cow RFI. Genomic breeding values for RFI were estimated from a reference population of 2,036 individuals in a multi-trait analysis including Australian calf RFI (n=843), Australian lactating cow RFI (n=234), and UK and Dutch lactating cow RFI (n=958). In all cases, the RFI phenotypes were deviations from a mean of 0, calculated by correcting dry matter intake for BW, growth, and milk yield (in the case of lactating cows). Single nucleotide polymorphism effects were calculated from the output of genomic BLUP and used to predict breeding values of 4,106 Holstein sires that were genotyped but did not have RFI phenotypes themselves. These bulls already had BW breeding values calculated from type traits, from which maintenance requirements in kilograms of feed per year were inferred. Finally, RFI and the feed required for maintenance (through BW) were used to calculate a feed saved breeding value and expressed as the predicted amount of feed saved per year. Animals that were 1 standard deviation above the mean were predicted to eat 66 kg dry matter less per year at the same level of milk production. In a data set of genotyped Holstein sires, the mean reliability of the feed saved breeding value was 0.37. For Holsteins that are not genotyped and for breeds other than Holsteins, feed saved is calculated using BW only. From April 2015, feed saved has been included as part of the Australian national selection index, the Balanced Performance Index (BPI). Selection on the BPI is expected to lead to modest gains in feed efficiency.
Copyright © 2015 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  body weight; feed efficiency; residual feed intake

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26254533     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2015-9621

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  9 in total

1.  Gene expression analysis of blood, liver, and muscle in cattle divergently selected for high and low residual feed intake.

Authors:  M Khansefid; C A Millen; Y Chen; J E Pryce; A J Chamberlain; C J Vander Jagt; C Gondro; M E Goddard
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Eating Time as a Genetic Indicator of Methane Emissions and Feed Efficiency in Australian Maternal Composite Sheep.

Authors:  Boris J Sepulveda; Stephanie K Muir; Sunduimijid Bolormaa; Matthew I Knight; Ralph Behrendt; Iona M MacLeod; Jennie E Pryce; Hans D Daetwyler
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 4.772

3.  Selecting for Feed Efficient Cows Will Help to Reduce Methane Gas Emissions.

Authors:  Coralia Ines Valentina Manzanilla-Pech; Rasmus Bak Stephansen; Gareth Frank Difford; Peter Løvendahl; Jan Lassen
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 4.772

4.  Genome-wide associations and detection of potential candidate genes for direct genetic and maternal genetic effects influencing dairy cattle body weight at different ages.

Authors:  Tong Yin; Sven König
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 4.297

5.  Residual feed intake divergence during the preweaning period is associated with unique hindgut microbiome and metabolome profiles in neonatal Holstein heifer calves.

Authors:  Ahmed Elolimy; Abdulrahman Alharthi; Mohamed Zeineldin; Claudia Parys; Juan J Loor
Journal:  J Anim Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2020-01-20

6.  Effects of Incorporating Dry Matter Intake and Residual Feed Intake into a Selection Index for Dairy Cattle Using Deterministic Modeling.

Authors:  Kerry Houlahan; Flavio S Schenkel; Dagnachew Hailemariam; Jan Lassen; Morten Kargo; John B Cole; Erin E Connor; Silvia Wegmann; Oliveira Junior; Filippo Miglior; Allison Fleming; Tatiane C S Chud; Christine F Baes
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 7.  Opportunities to Harness High-Throughput and Novel Sensing Phenotypes to Improve Feed Efficiency in Dairy Cattle.

Authors:  Cori J Siberski-Cooper; James E Koltes
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 2.752

8.  Sharing of either phenotypes or genetic variants can increase the accuracy of genomic prediction of feed efficiency.

Authors:  Sunduimijid Bolormaa; Iona M MacLeod; Majid Khansefid; Leah C Marett; William J Wales; Filippo Miglior; Christine F Baes; Flavio S Schenkel; Erin E Connor; Coralia I V Manzanilla-Pech; Paul Stothard; Emily Herman; Gert J Nieuwhof; Michael E Goddard; Jennie E Pryce
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-09-06       Impact factor: 5.100

9.  GWAS and eQTL analysis identifies a SNP associated with both residual feed intake and GFRA2 expression in beef cattle.

Authors:  Marc G Higgins; Claire Fitzsimons; Matthew C McClure; Clare McKenna; Stephen Conroy; David A Kenny; Mark McGee; Sinéad M Waters; Derek W Morris
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-09-24       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.