Literature DB >> 29153163

A 100-Year Review: Methods and impact of genetic selection in dairy cattle-From daughter-dam comparisons to deep learning algorithms.

K A Weigel1, P M VanRaden2, H D Norman3, H Grosu4.   

Abstract

In the early 1900s, breed society herdbooks had been established and milk-recording programs were in their infancy. Farmers wanted to improve the productivity of their cattle, but the foundations of population genetics, quantitative genetics, and animal breeding had not been laid. Early animal breeders struggled to identify genetically superior families using performance records that were influenced by local environmental conditions and herd-specific management practices. Daughter-dam comparisons were used for more than 30 yr and, although genetic progress was minimal, the attention given to performance recording, genetic theory, and statistical methods paid off in future years. Contemporary (herdmate) comparison methods allowed more accurate accounting for environmental factors and genetic progress began to accelerate when these methods were coupled with artificial insemination and progeny testing. Advances in computing facilitated the implementation of mixed linear models that used pedigree and performance data optimally and enabled accurate selection decisions. Sequencing of the bovine genome led to a revolution in dairy cattle breeding, and the pace of scientific discovery and genetic progress accelerated rapidly. Pedigree-based models have given way to whole-genome prediction, and Bayesian regression models and machine learning algorithms have joined mixed linear models in the toolbox of modern animal breeders. Future developments will likely include elucidation of the mechanisms of genetic inheritance and epigenetic modification in key biological pathways, and genomic data will be used with data from on-farm sensors to facilitate precision management on modern dairy farms.
Copyright © 2017 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dairy cattle; genetic selection; genomic selection; statistical models

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29153163     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2017-12954

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


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of two diagnostic methods through blood and urine sample analyses for the detection of ketosis in cattle.

Authors:  Karla Verónica Borja; Andrés Miguel Amador; Silvana Hipatia Santander Parra; Cristian Fernando Cárdenas; Luis Fabian Núñez
Journal:  Vet World       Date:  2022-03-26

2.  Prediction of Complex Traits: Robust Alternatives to Best Linear Unbiased Prediction.

Authors:  Daniel Gianola; Alessio Cecchinato; Hugo Naya; Chris-Carolin Schön
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 4.599

3.  Can We Breed Cattle for Lower Bovine TB Infectivity?

Authors:  Smaragda Tsairidou; Adrian Allen; Georgios Banos; Mike Coffey; Osvaldo Anacleto; Andrew W Byrne; Robin A Skuce; Elizabeth J Glass; John A Woolliams; Andrea B Doeschl-Wilson
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2018-12-07

Review 4.  Factors That Optimize Reproductive Efficiency in Dairy Herds with an Emphasis on Timed Artificial Insemination Programs.

Authors:  Carlos Eduardo Cardoso Consentini; Milo Charles Wiltbank; Roberto Sartori
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 2.752

5.  Direct Phenotyping and Principal Component Analysis of Type Traits Implicate Novel QTL in Bovine Mastitis through Genome-Wide Association.

Authors:  Asha M Miles; Christian J Posbergh; Heather J Huson
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Large-Scale Multiplexing Permits Full-Length Transcriptome Annotation of 32 Bovine Tissues From a Single Nanopore Flow Cell.

Authors:  Michelle M Halstead; Alma Islas-Trejo; Daniel E Goszczynski; Juan F Medrano; Huaijun Zhou; Pablo J Ross
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 4.599

7.  De novo assembly of the cattle reference genome with single-molecule sequencing.

Authors:  Benjamin D Rosen; Derek M Bickhart; Robert D Schnabel; Sergey Koren; Christine G Elsik; Elizabeth Tseng; Troy N Rowan; Wai Y Low; Aleksey Zimin; Christine Couldrey; Richard Hall; Wenli Li; Arang Rhie; Jay Ghurye; Stephanie D McKay; Françoise Thibaud-Nissen; Jinna Hoffman; Brenda M Murdoch; Warren M Snelling; Tara G McDaneld; John A Hammond; John C Schwartz; Wilson Nandolo; Darren E Hagen; Christian Dreischer; Sebastian J Schultheiss; Steven G Schroeder; Adam M Phillippy; John B Cole; Curtis P Van Tassell; George Liu; Timothy P L Smith; Juan F Medrano
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 6.524

8.  Spatial modelling improves genetic evaluation in smallholder breeding programs.

Authors:  Maria L Selle; Ingelin Steinsland; Owen Powell; John M Hickey; Gregor Gorjanc
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 4.297

9.  Random Regression Model for Genetic Evaluation and Early Selection in the Iranian Holstein Population.

Authors:  Yasamin Salimiyekta; Rasoul Vaez-Torshizi; Mokhtar Ali Abbasi; Nasser Emmamjome-Kashan; Mehdi Amin-Afshar; Xiangyu Guo; Just Jensen
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 2.752

10.  Metadata analysis indicates biased estimation of genetic parameters and gains using conventional pedigree information instead of genomic-based approaches in tree breeding.

Authors:  Jean Beaulieu; Patrick Lenz; Jean Bousquet
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.996

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.