Literature DB >> 29293732

Genetic parameters for carcass and ultrasound traits in Hereford and admixed Simmental beef cattle: Accuracy of evaluating carcass traits.

H Su, B Golden, L Hyde, S Sanders, D Garrick.   

Abstract

Genetic parameters are required to evaluate carcass merit using correlated real-time ultrasound (RTU) measurements. Many registered bulls and heifers are measured using RTU before consideration for selection as parents, whereas few animals are recorded for carcass traits and those are often crossbred steers. The objective of this study was to estimate genetic parameters required for evaluating carcass merit in the American Hereford Association (AHA) and the American Simmental Association (ASA) using multivariate models and to assess accuracy of carcass trait estimated breeding values (EBV) for selection candidates. All available carcass data including carcass weight (CWT), fat thickness (FAT), longissimus muscle area (LMA), and marbling score (MRB) were provided by the AHA and the ASA along with RTU data including fat thickness (UFAT), longissimus muscle area (ULMA), and percentage of intramuscular fat (UIMF). Carcass data comprised 6,054 AHA and 9,056 ASA cattle, while RTU data in comparable numbers from close relatives comprised 6,074 AHA and 7,753 ASA cattle. Pedigrees included 33,226 AHA and 37,665 ASA animals. Fixed effects for carcass and RTU data included contemporary group, age at scan/slaughter, and major breed percentages. Restricted maximum likelihood procedures were applied to all the carcass and RTU measurements, along with birth weight to account for selection, fitting 8-trait multivariate models separately for each breed association. Heritability estimates for AHA and ASA carcass traits were 0.41 ± 0.04 and 0.25 ± 0.03 for FAT, 0.47 ± 0.04 and 0.32 ± 0.03 for LMA, 0.48 ± 0.04 and 0.43 ± 0.04 for MRB, 0.51 ± 0.04 and 0.34 ± 0.03 for CWT, and for RTU traits were 0.29 ± 0.04 and 0.37 ± 0.03 for UFAT, 0.31 ± 0.04 and 0.44 ± 0.03 for ULMA, and 0.45 ± 0.04 and 0.42 ± 0.03 for UIMF. Genetic correlations for AHA and ASA analyses between FAT and UFAT were 0.74 ± 0.08 and 0.28 ± 0.13, between LMA and ULMA were 0.81 ± 0.07 and 0.57 ± 0.10, and between MRB and UIMF were 0.54 ± 0.08 and 0.73 ± 0.07. Predictions of carcass merit using RTU measurements in Hereford cattle would be more reliable for FAT and LMA than MRB, but the reverse would be true for admixed Simmental cattle. Genetic correlations for MRB in AHA and for FAT and LMA in ASA are less than currently assumed in their national evaluations. Collection of greater numbers of carcass measurements would improve the accuracy of genetic evaluations for carcass traits in both breeds.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29293732      PMCID: PMC6292288          DOI: 10.2527/jas2017.1865

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  19 in total

1.  Genetic correlation estimates between ultrasound measurements on yearling bulls and carcass measurements on finished steers.

Authors:  C J Devitt; J W Wilton
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Genetic evaluation of carcass yield using ultrasound measures on young replacement beef cattle.

Authors:  D H Crews; R A Kemp
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Genetic parameters for carcass traits and their live animal indicators in Simmental cattle.

Authors:  D H Crews; E J Pollak; R L Weaber; R L Quaas; R J Lipsey
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Genetic relationships between calving and carcass traits for Charolais and Hereford cattle in Sweden.

Authors:  S Eriksson; A Näsholm; K Johansson; J Philipsson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 5.  Heritability estimates for carcass traits of cattle: a review.

Authors:  Angel Ríos Utrera; Lloyd Dale Van Vleck
Journal:  Genet Mol Res       Date:  2004-09-30

6.  Genetic evaluation of beef carcass data using different endpoint adjustments.

Authors:  J M Rumph; W R Shafer; D H Crews; R M Enns; R J Lipsey; R L Quaas; E J Pollak
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2007-01-15       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Genetic analyses of live-animal ultrasound and abattoir carcass traits in Australian Angus and Hereford cattle.

Authors:  A Reverter; D J Johnston; H U Graser; M L Wolcott; W H Upton
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Simmental-sired cattle at different slaughter end points.

Authors:  B C Shanks; M W Tess; D D Kress; B E Cunningham
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.159

9.  Genetic parameters for ultrasound and carcass measures of yield and quality among replacement and slaughter beef cattle.

Authors:  D H Crews; R A Kemp
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Purebred-crossbred performance and genetic evaluation of postweaning growth and carcass traits in Bos indicus x Bos taurus crosses in Australia.

Authors:  S Newman; A Reverter; D J Johnston
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 3.159

View more
  3 in total

1.  Random regression of Hereford percentage intramuscular fat on geographical coordinates.

Authors:  Jose S Delgadillo Liberona; John M Langdon; Andy D Herring; Harvey D Blackburn; Scott E Speidel; Stacy Sanders; David G Riley
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Integrating the RFID identification system for Charolaise breeding bulls with 3D imaging for virtual archive creation.

Authors:  Maria Grazia Cappai; Filippo Gambella; Davide Piccirilli; Nicola Graziano Rubiu; Corrado Dimauro; Antonio Luigi Pazzona; Walter Pinna
Journal:  PeerJ Comput Sci       Date:  2019-03-04

3.  Estimation of Genetic Parameters and Correlation between Yearling Ultrasound Measurements and Carcass Traits in Hanwoo Cattle.

Authors:  Masoumeh Naserkheil; Deuk-Hwan Lee; Hong-Sik Kong; Jiyeon Seong; Hossein Mehrban
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-16       Impact factor: 2.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.