| Literature DB >> 32322393 |
K M Tiplady1,2, T J Lopdell1, M D Littlejohn1,2, D J Garrick2.
Abstract
Over the last 100 years, significant advances have been made in the characterisation of milk composition for dairy cattle improvement programs. Technological progress has enabled a shift from labour intensive, on-farm collection and processing of samples that assess yield and fat levels in milk, to large-scale processing of samples through centralised laboratories, with the scope extended to include quantification of other traits. Fourier-transform mid-infrared (FT-MIR) spectroscopy has had a significant role in the transformation of milk composition phenotyping, with spectral-based predictions of major milk components already being widely used in milk payment and animal evaluation systems globally. Increasingly, there is interest in analysing the individual FT-MIR wavenumbers, and in utilising the FT-MIR data to predict other novel traits of importance to breeding programs. This includes traits related to the nutritional value of milk, the processability of milk into products such as cheese, and traits relevant to animal health and the environment. The ability to successfully incorporate these traits into breeding programs is dependent on the heritability of the FT-MIR predicted traits, and the genetic correlations between the FT-MIR predicted and actual trait values. Linking FT-MIR predicted traits to the underlying mutations responsible for their variation can be difficult because the phenotypic expression of these traits are a function of a diverse range of molecular and biological mechanisms that can obscure their genetic basis. The individual FT-MIR wavenumbers give insights into the chemical composition of milk and provide an additional layer of granularity that may assist with establishing causal links between the genome and observed phenotypes. Additionally, there are other molecular phenotypes such as those related to the metabolome, chromatin accessibility, and RNA editing that could improve our understanding of the underlying biological systems controlling traits of interest. Here we review topics of importance to phenotyping and genetic applications of FT-MIR spectra datasets, and discuss opportunities for consolidating FT-MIR datasets with other genomic and molecular data sources to improve future dairy cattle breeding programs.Entities:
Keywords: Bovine milk; Cattle breeding genetics; Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy; Trait prediction
Year: 2020 PMID: 32322393 PMCID: PMC7164258 DOI: 10.1186/s40104-020-00445-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Sci Biotechnol ISSN: 1674-9782
Fig. 1Characterisation of the relationships between molecular and biological mechanisms underlying phenotypic trait expression
Heritability estimates for FT-MIR predicted fatty acids (h2), and their genetic correlations (r) with GC-baseda fatty acids
| Individual fatty acidsb | Lopez-Villalobos et al. [ | Soyeurt et al. [ | Rutten et al. [ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C4:0 | 0.38 (0.03) | – | 0.42 (0.09) | 0.94 (0.03) |
| C6:0 | 0.32 (0.03) | – | 0.35 (0.09) | 0.97 (0.02) |
| C8:0 | 0.29 (0.03) | – | 0.38 (0.09) | 0.99 (0.01) |
| C10:0 | 0.17 (0.02) | – | 0.46 (0.10) | 0.98 (0.01) |
| C10:1 | 0.30 (0.02) | – | – | – |
| C12:0 | 0.16 (0.02) | 0.29 (0.02) | 0.54 (0.11) | 0.97 (0.02) |
| C12:1 | 0.41 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| C14:0 | 0.19 (0.02) | 0.31 (0.03) | 0.50 (0.10) | 0.99 (0.01) |
| C14:1 | 0.27 (0.01) | – | – | – |
| C15:0 | 0.22 (0.02) | – | – | – |
| C16:0 | 0.29 (0.02) | 0.38 (0.02) | 0.30 (0.09) | 0.86 (0.07) |
| C16:1 | 0.30 (0.02) | – | – | – |
| C17:0 | 0.41 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| C17:1 | 0.14 (0.02) | – | – | – |
| C18:0 | 0.26 (0.02) | 0.30 (0.02) | 0.52 (0.10) | 0.82 (0.08) |
| C18:1 | 0.43 (0.03) | 0.05 (0.01) | – | – |
| C18:1 | 0.22 (0.02) | – | 0.25 (0.08) | 0.93 (0.05) |
| C18:1 | 0.27 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| C18:2 | 0.45 (0.03) | 0.20 (0.02) | – | – |
| C18:2 | 0.41 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| C20:0 | 0.38 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| C20:1 | 0.37 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| C22:0 | 0.35 (0.03) | – | – | – |
| Grouped fatty acidsc | Lopez-Villalobos et al. [ | Hein et al. [ | Fleming et al. [ | Narayana et al. [ |
| SCFA | 0.39 (0.03) | 0.16 | 0.42 | 0.24 |
| MCFA | 0.30 (0.03) | 0.12 | 0.50 | 0.32 |
| LCFA | 0.50 (0.03) | 0.11 | 0.26 | 0.23 |
| SFA | 0.46 (0.03) | 0.15 | 0.51 | 0.33 |
| UFA | 0.48 (0.03) | – | 0.26 | 0.21 |
| PUFA | 0.42 (0.03) | – | – | – |
aGC-based Gas chromatography based.
bAll fatty acids expressed as a % of the total fatty acids.
cSCFA Short-chain fatty acids, MCFA Medium-chain fatty acids, LCFA Long-chain fatty acids, SFA Saturated fatty acids, UFA Unsaturated fatty acids, PUFA Polyunsaturated fatty acids.
Heritability estimates of FT-MIR predicted milk processability traits (h2), and their genetic correlations (r) with measured traits
| Traita | Visentin et al. [ | Cecchinato et al. [ | Costa et al. [ | Sanchez et al. [ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coagulation traits | ||||
| RCT, min | 0.28 (0.01) | 0.30–0.34 (0.08) | 0.35 (0.05) | – |
| k20, min | 0.43 (0.02) | – | 0.43 (0.03) | – |
| a30, mm | 0.36 (0.02) | 0.22–0.27 (0.07) | 0.39 (0.03) | – |
| a60, mm | 0.27 (0.01) | – | – | – |
| HCT, min | 0.16 (0.01) | – | – | – |
| CMS, nm | 0.31 (0.02) | – | – | – |
| Acidity | ||||
| pH, units | 0.27 (0.01) | – | – | 0.37 (0.01) |
| Minerals, mg/kg milk | ||||
| Calcium | – | – | 0.45 (0.02) | 0.50 (0.01) |
| Phosphorus | – | – | 0.53 (0.03) | 0.56 (0.01) |
| Magnesium | – | – | 0.47 (0.03) | 0.52 (0.01) |
| Potassium | – | – | 0.45 (0.03) | 0.53 (0.01) |
| Sodium | – | – | 0.38 (0.03) | 0.32 (0.01) |
| Sanchez et al. [ | Bittante et al. [ | Cecchinato et al. [ | ||
| Cheese yield, % | ||||
| CYCURD | 0.38 (0.01) | 0.21 (0.09) | 0.97 | 0.18–0.33 |
| CYSOLIDS | 0.39 (0.01) | 0.22 (0.08) | 0.98 | 0.18–0.28 |
| CYWATER | – | 0.18 (0.05) | 0.76 | 0.14–0.29 |
| Nutrient recovery, % | ||||
| RECPROTEIN | – | 0.44 (0.09) | 0.88 | 0.32–0.41 |
| RECFAT | – | 0.28 (0.07) | 0.79 | 0.15–0.33 |
| RECENERGY | – | 0.21 (0.07) | 0.96 | 0.19–0.30 |
| RECSOLIDS | – | 0.24 (0.08) | 0.98 | 0.17–0.29 |
aRCT Rennet coagulation time; k20 = curd-firming time; a30 = curd firmness after 30 min; a60 = curd firmness after 60 min; HCT = heat coagulation time; CMS = casein micelle size; CY: weight of fresh curd, curd solids, and curd as a percentage of weight of milk processed; REC: protein, fat, energy and solids of the curd as a percentage of the protein, fat, energy and solids of the milk processed.
bRange of estimates from 4 subsets of data used to validate calibration equations.
cRange of estimates from 3 different breeds.