Literature DB >> 35044465

Genetic parameters, heterosis, and breed effects for body condition score and mature cow weight in beef cattle.

André Mauric F Ribeiro1,2, Leticia P Sanglard1, Warren M Snelling3, R Mark Thallman3, Larry A Kuehn3, Matthew L Spangler1.   

Abstract

Understanding the genetic relationship between mature cow weight (MWT) and body condition score (BCS) is useful to implement selection programs focused on cow efficiency. The objectives of this study were to estimate genetic parameters, heterosis, and breed effects for MWT and BCS. In total, 25,035 and 24,522 overlapping records were available for MWT and BCS on 6,138 and 6,131 cows, respectively, from the Germplasm Evaluation program, a crossbred beef population at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. Pedigree was available for 48,013 individuals. Univariate animal models were used to estimate heritabilities for each trait by parity. Bivariate animal models were used to estimate genetic correlations between parities within a trait and between traits within parities. Bivariate repeatability animal models were used to estimate genetic correlations between traits across parities. Estimates of heritability for different parities ranged from 0.43 ± 0.05 to 0.55 ± 0.07 for MWT and from 0.12 ± 0.03 to 0.25 ± 0.04 for BCS and were lower with the repeatability model at 0.40 ± 0.02 and 0.11 ± 0.01 for MWT and BCS, respectively. Estimates of repeatability were high for MWT (0.67 ± 0.005) and low for BCS (0.22 ± 0.006). Estimates of genetic correlation for MWT and BCS between parities were, in general, high, especially between consecutive parities. Estimates of genetic correlation between MWT and BCS were positive and moderate, ranging from 0.32 ± 0.09 to 0.68 ± 0.14. The direct heterosis estimates were 21.56 ± 3.53 kg (P ≤ 0.001) for MWT and 0.095 ± 0.034 (P ≤ 0.001) for BCS. Ordered by decreasing MWT, the breeds ranked Brahman, Charolais, Angus, Simmental, Salers, Hereford, Santa Gertrudis, Chiangus, Brangus, Red Angus, Shorthorn, Maine-Anjou, Gelbvieh, Beefmaster, Limousin, and Braunvieh. Ordered by decreasing BCS, the breeds ranked Brahman, Red Angus, Charolais, Angus, Hereford, Brangus, Beefmaster, Chiangus, Salers, Simmental, Maine-Anjou, Limousin, Santa Gertrudis, Shorthorn, Gelbvieh, and Braunvieh. Estimates of breed differences for MWT were also adjusted for BCS (AMWT), and in general, AMWT depicted smaller differences between breeds with some degree of re-ranking (r = 0.59). These results suggest that MWT and BCS are at least moderately genetically correlated and that they would respond favorably to selection. Estimates of breed differences and heterotic effects could be used to parameterize multibreed genetic evaluations for indicators of cow maintenance energy requirements.
© The Author(s) 2022. 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 cattle; body condition score; breed effects; genetic parameters; heterosis; mature weight

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35044465      PMCID: PMC8903176          DOI: 10.1093/jas/skac017

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


  17 in total

1.  Genetic parameters for weight, weight adjusted for body condition score, height, and body condition score in beef cows.

Authors:  J A Arango; L V Cundiff; L D Van Vleck
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  Size of beef cows: early ideas, new developments.

Authors:  Jesus A Arango; L Dale Van Vleck
Journal:  Genet Mol Res       Date:  2002-03-31

3.  Estimation of breed-specific heterosis effects for birth, weaning, and yearling weight in cattle.

Authors:  L N Schiermiester; R M Thallman; L A Kuehn; S D Kachman; M L Spangler
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Adjustment factors for carcass, gain and feed traits of beef cattle.

Authors:  L A Swiger; K E Gregory; V H Arthaud; B C Briedenstein; R M Koch; L J Sumption; W W Rowden
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1966-02       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Breed comparisons of Angus, Brahman, Hereford, Pinzgauer, Sahiwal, and Tarentaise for weight, weight adjusted for condition score, height, and body condition score.

Authors:  J A Arango; L V Cundiff; L D Van Vleck
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Evaluation of between- and within-breed variation in measures of weight-age relationships.

Authors:  T G Jenkins; M Kaps; L V Cundiff; C L Ferrell
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Genetic correlations among weight and cumulative productivity of crossbred beef cows.

Authors:  Warren M Snelling; Larry A Kuehn; R Mark Thallman; Gary L Bennett; Bruce L Golden
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Characterization of biological types of cattle (Cycle VII): influence of postpartum interval and estrous cycle length on fertility.

Authors:  R A Cushman; M F Allan; R M Thallman; L V Cundiff
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2007-05-15       Impact factor: 3.159

9.  Genetic relationships between sex-specific traits in beef cattle: mature weight, weight adjusted for body condition score, height and body condition score of cows, and carcass traits of their steer relatives.

Authors:  K A Nephawe; L V Cundiff; M E Dikeman; J D Crouse; L D Van Vleck
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Breed and heterotic effects for mature weight in beef cattle.

Authors:  Madeline J Zimmermann; Larry A Kuehn; Matthew L Spangler; R Mark Thallman; Warren M Snelling; Ronald M Lewis
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 3.338

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.