Literature DB >> 31628487

Using the difference in actual and expected calf liveweight relative to its dam liveweight as a statistic for interherd and intraherd benchmarking and genetic evaluations1.

Noirin McHugh1, Ross D Evans2, Donagh P Berry1.   

Abstract

The importance of improving the efficiency of beef production systems using both genetic and management strategies has long been discussed. Despite the contribution of the mature beef herd to the overall cost of production in the sector as a whole, most strategies for improving (feed) efficiency have focused on the growing animal. The objective of the present study was to quantify the phenotypic and genetic variability in several novel measures that relate the weight of a calf to that of its dam and vice versa. Two novel residual traits, representing the deviation in calf weight relative to its expectation from the population based on its dam's weight (DIFFcalf) or the deviation in the weight of the dam relative to its expectation from the population based on its calf's weight (DIFFdam), were calculated while simultaneously accounting for some nuisance factors in a multiple regression model. Four supplementary traits were also calculated, namely, 1) the deviation in calf weight from its expectation expressed relative to the weight of the dam (DIFFcalf_ratio), 2) the deviation in dam weight from its expectation relative to the weight of the dam (DIFFdam_ratio), 3) DIFFcalf-DIFFdam, and 4) the simple ratio of calf weight to its dam's weight (RATIOcalfdam). Genetic and residual variance components for each of the 6 traits were estimated using animal-dam linear mixed models. The phenotypic SD for DIFFcalf was 42 kg and, when expressed relative to the weight of the dam (i.e., DIFFcalf_ratio), was 0.07. The genetic SD for DIFFcalf and DIFFcalf_ratio was 16.66 kg and 0.02, respectively. The direct and maternal heritability estimated for DIFFcalf was 0.28 (SE = 0.04) and 0.11 (SE = 0.02), respectively, and for DIFFcalf_ratio was 0.24 (SE = 0.04) and 0.17 (SE = 0.03), respectively. The genetic SD for DIFFdam was 47.09 kg; the direct heritability was 0.50 (SE = 0.03), and the dam repeatability was 0.75 (SE = 0.01). The genetic SD for RATIOcalfdam was 0.03; the direct and maternal heritability was 0.24 (SE = 0.04) and 0.24 (SE = 0.03), respectively. The suggested traits outlined in the present study provide useful metrics for benchmarking dam-calf efficiency; in addition, the genetic variability detected in these traits suggest genetic progress for more efficient dam-calf pairs is indeed possible.
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  beef; efficiency; genetics; weight

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31628487      PMCID: PMC6915211          DOI: 10.1093/jas/skz331

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


  13 in total

1.  The environmental impact of beef production in the United States: 1977 compared with 2007.

Authors:  J L Capper
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Residual intake and body weight gain: a new measure of efficiency in growing cattle.

Authors:  D P Berry; J J Crowley
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Evaluation of developed low-density genotype panels for imputation to higher density in independent dairy and beef cattle populations.

Authors:  M M Judge; J F Kearney; M C McClure; R D Sleator; D P Berry
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Energy requirements for maintenance of crossbred beef cattle with different genetic potential for milk.

Authors:  M Montaño-Bermudez; M K Nielsen; G H Deutscher
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Genetic parameters for cattle price and body weight from routinely collected data at livestock auctions and commercial farms.

Authors:  N Mc Hugh; R D Evans; P R Amer; A G Fahey; D P Berry
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 6.  Symposium review: Breeding a better cow-Will she be adaptable?

Authors:  D P Berry
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 4.034

7.  Genetic relationships between feed efficiency in growing males and beef cow performance.

Authors:  J J Crowley; R D Evans; N Mc Hugh; D A Kenny; M McGee; D H Crews; D P Berry
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 8.  Cell Biology Symposium: genetics of feed efficiency in dairy and beef cattle.

Authors:  D P Berry; J J Crowley
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 3.159

9.  Design of a bovine low-density SNP array optimized for imputation.

Authors:  Didier Boichard; Hoyoung Chung; Romain Dassonneville; Xavier David; André Eggen; Sébastien Fritz; Kimberly J Gietzen; Ben J Hayes; Cynthia T Lawley; Tad S Sonstegard; Curtis P Van Tassell; Paul M VanRaden; Karine A Viaud-Martinez; George R Wiggans
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Impact of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Production Systems.

Authors:  Judith L Capper
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2012-04-10       Impact factor: 2.752

View more
  1 in total

1.  An index framework founded on the future profit potential of female beef cattle to aid the identification of candidates for culling.

Authors:  Fíona L Dunne; Donagh P Berry; Margaret M Kelleher; Ross D Evans; Siobhan W Walsh; Peter R Amer
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 3.159

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.