Accounting for dominance to improve genomic evaluations of dairy cows for fertility and milk production traits

被引:70
|
作者
Aliloo, Hassan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Pryce, Jennie E. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Gonzalez-Recio, Oscar [3 ,4 ]
Cocks, Benjamin G. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hayes, Ben J. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] AgriBio, Jobs Transport & Resources, Dept Econ Dev, Biosci Res Div, 5 Ring Rd, Bundoora, Vic 3083, Australia
[2] La Trobe Univ, Sch Appl Syst Biol, Bundoora, Vic 3083, Australia
[3] AgriBio, Dairy Futures Cooperat Res Ctr CRC, 5 Ring Rd, Bundoora, Vic 3083, Australia
[4] INIA, Dept Anim Breeding, Ctra La Coruna Km 7-5, Madrid 28040, Spain
关键词
NONADDITIVE GENETIC-VARIATION; INBREEDING DEPRESSION; METHOD-R; VARIANCE; HOLSTEIN; CATTLE; PREDICTIONS; SELECTION; YIELD;
D O I
10.1186/s12711-016-0186-0
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Background: Dominance effects may contribute to genetic variation of complex traits in dairy cattle, especially for traits closely related to fitness such as fertility. However, traditional genetic evaluations generally ignore dominance effects and consider additive genetic effects only. Availability of dense single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) panels provides the opportunity to investigate the role of dominance in quantitative variation of complex traits at both the SNP and animal levels. Including dominance effects in the genomic evaluation of animals could also help to increase the accuracy of prediction of future phenotypes. In this study, we estimated additive and dominance variance components for fertility and milk production traits of genotyped Holstein and Jersey cows in Australia. The predictive abilities of a model that accounts for additive effects only (additive), and a model that accounts for both additive and dominance effects (additive + dominance) were compared in a fivefold cross-validation. Results: Estimates of the proportion of dominance variation relative to phenotypic variation that is captured by SNPs, for production traits, were up to 3.8 and 7.1 % in Holstein and Jersey cows, respectively, whereas, for fertility, they were equal to 1.2 % in Holstein and very close to zero in Jersey cows. We found that including dominance in the model was not consistently advantageous. Based on maximum likelihood ratio tests, the additive + dominance model fitted the data better than the additive model, for milk, fat and protein yields in both breeds. However, regarding the prediction of phenotypes assessed with fivefold cross-validation, including dominance effects in the model improved accuracy only for fat yield in Holstein cows. Regression coefficients of phenotypes on genetic values and mean squared errors of predictions showed that the predictive ability of the additive + dominance model was superior to that of the additive model for some of the traits. Conclusions: In both breeds, dominance effects were significant (P < 0.01) for all milk production traits but not for fertility. Accuracy of prediction of phenotypes was slightly increased by including dominance effects in the genomic evaluation model. Thus, it can help to better identify highly performing individuals and be useful for culling decisions.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Genetic Relationships Among Resilience, Fertility and Milk Production Traits in Crossbred Dairy Cows Performing in Sub-Saharan Africa
    Oloo, R. D.
    Mrode, R.
    Ekine-Dzivenu, C. C.
    Ojango, J. M. K.
    Bennewitz, J.
    Gebreyohanes, G.
    Okeyo, A. M.
    Chagunda, M. G. G.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2025,
  • [22] Genomic additive and dominance variance of milk performance traits
    Wittenburg, D.
    Melzer, N.
    Reinsch, N.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2015, 132 (01) : 3 - 8
  • [23] Genomic dominance variance analysis of health and milk production traits in German Holstein cattle
    Schneider, Helen
    Heise, Johannes
    Tetens, Jens
    Thaller, Georg
    Wellmann, Robin
    Bennewitz, Joern
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2023, 140 (04) : 390 - 399
  • [24] PRELIMINARY REPORT ON THE INFLUENCE OF SOIL FERTILITY ON THE HEALTH, REPRODUCTION AND MILK PRODUCTION OF DAIRY COWS
    DUNCAN, CW
    DUNN, KM
    ELY, RE
    DEXTER, ST
    MILLAR, CE
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 1949, 32 (08) : 716 - 716
  • [25] Milk progesterone profiles and their relationship with fertility, production and disease in dairy cows in Northern Ireland
    McCoy, MA
    Lennox, SD
    Mayne, CS
    McCaughey, WJ
    Edgar, HWJ
    Catney, DC
    Verner, M
    Mackey, DR
    Gordon, AW
    ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2006, 82 : 213 - 222
  • [26] Feeding practices of dairy cows in Algeria: Characterization, typology, and impact on milk production and fertility
    Boukhechem, Said
    Moula, Nassim
    Lakhdara, Nedjoua
    Kaidi, Rachid
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED VETERINARY AND ANIMAL RESEARCH, 2019, 6 (04) : 567 - 574
  • [27] Do mats matter? - Comparison of fertility traits and milk yield in dairy cows on rubber or concrete flooring
    Kremer, Prisca V.
    Scholz, Armin M.
    Nueske, Stefan
    Foerster, Martin
    ARCHIV FUR TIERZUCHT-ARCHIVES OF ANIMAL BREEDING, 2012, 55 (05): : 438 - 449
  • [28] Identification strategy of major genes for milk production traits in genetic selection of dairy cows
    Peng, Xiayu
    Wei, Yong
    Zou, Aling
    Zhang, Shasha
    Wei, Tianyu
    Journal of Biotech Research, 2024, 17 : 92 - 104
  • [29] Genotype by Environment Interaction for Fertility, Survival, and Milk Production Traits in Australian Dairy Cattle
    Haile-Mariam, M.
    Carrick, M. J.
    Goddard, M. E.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2008, 91 (12) : 4840 - 4853
  • [30] Relationships between milk urea and production, nutrition, and fertility traits in Israeli dairy herds
    Hojman, D
    Kroll, O
    Adin, G
    Gips, M
    Hanochi, B
    Ezra, E
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2004, 87 (04) : 1001 - 1011