Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-ssw5r Total loading time: 0.338 Render date: 2022-08-08T19:51:16.223Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

Application of the a posteriori granddaughter design to the Holstein genome

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2014

J. I. Weller*
Affiliation:
The Volcani Center, Institute of Animal Sciences, A.R.O., Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
J. B. Cole
Affiliation:
Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD 20705-2350, USA
P. M. VanRaden
Affiliation:
Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD 20705-2350, USA
G. R. Wiggans
Affiliation:
Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD 20705-2350, USA
Get access

Abstract

An a posteriori granddaughter design was applied to estimate quantitative trait loci genotypes of sires with many sons in the US Holstein population. The results of this analysis can be used to determine concordance between specific polymorphisms and segregating quantitative trait loci. Determination of the actual polymorphisms responsible for observed genetic variation should increase the accuracy of genomic evaluations and rates of genetic gain. A total of 52 grandsire families, each with ⩾100 genotyped sons with genetic evaluations based on progeny tests, were analyzed for 33 traits (milk, fat and protein yields; fat and protein percentages; somatic cell score (SCS); productive life; daughter pregnancy rate; heifer and cow conception rates; service-sire and daughter calving ease; service-sire and daughter stillbirth rates; 18 conformation traits; and net merit). Of 617 haplotype segments spanning the entire bovine genome and each including ~5×106 bp, 5 cM and 50 genes, 608 autosomal segments were analyzed. A total of 19 335 unique haplotypes were found among the 52 grandsires. There were a total of 133 chromosomal segment-by-trait combinations, for which the nominal probability of significance for the haplotype effect was <10−8, which corresponds to genome-wide significance of <10−4. The number of chromosomal regions that met this criterion by trait ranged from one for rear legs (rear view) to seven for net merit. For each of the putative quantitative trait loci, at least one grandsire family had a within-family contrast with a t-value of >3. Confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by the nonparametric bootstrap for the largest effect for each of nine traits. The bootstrap distribution generated by 100 samples was bimodal only for net merit, which had the widest 90% CI (eight haplotype segments). This may be due to the fact that net merit is a composite trait. For all other chromosomes, the CI spanned less than a third of the chromosome. The narrowest CI (a single haplotype segment) was found for SCS. It is likely that analysis by more advanced methods could further reduce CIs at least by half. These results can be used as a first step to determine the actual polymorphisms responsible for observed quantitative variation in dairy cattle.

Type
Full Paper
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014. Parts of this are a work of the U.S. Government and not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashwell, MS, Heyen, DW, Sonstegard, TS, Van Tassell, CP, Da, Y, VanRaden, PM, Ron, M, Weller, JI and Lewin, HA 2004. Detection of quantitative trait loci affecting milk production, health, and reproductive traits in Holstein cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 468475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennewitz, J, Reinsch, N and Kalm, E 2002. Improved confidence intervals in quantitative trait loci mapping by permutation bootstrapping. Genetics 160, 16731686.Google ScholarPubMed
Bennewitz, J, Reinsch, N, Guiard, V, Fritz, S, Thomsen, H, Looft, C, Kühn, C, Schwerin, M, Weimann, C, Erhardt, G, Reinhardt, F, Reents, R, Boichard, D and Kalm, E 2004. Multiple quantitative trait loci mapping with cofactors and application of alternative variants of the false discovery rate in an enlarged granddaughter design. Genetics 168, 10191027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen-Zinder, M, Seroussi, E, Larkin, DM, Loor, JJ, Everts-van der Wind, A, Lee, JH, Drackley, JK, Band, MR, Hernandez, AG, Shani, M, Lewin, HA, Weller, JI and Ron, M 2005. Identification of a missense mutation in the bovine ABCG2 gene with a major effect on the QTL on chromosome 6 affecting milk yield and composition in Holstein cattle. Genome Research 15, 936944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, JB, VanRaden, PM and Multi-State Project S-1040 2010. Net merit as a measure of lifetime profit: 2010 revision AIPL Res Rep NM$4(12-09). Retrieved April 4, 2013 from http://aipl.arsusda.gov/reference/nmcalc-2010.htm Google Scholar
Cole, JB, VanRaden, PM, O'Connell, JR, Van Tassell, CP, Sonstegard, TS, Schnabel, RD, Taylor , JF and Wiggans, GR 2009. Distribution and location of genetic effects for dairy traits. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 29312946.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cole, JB, Wiggans, GR, Ma, L, Sonstegard, TS, Lawlor, TJ Jr, Crooker, BA, Van Tassel, CP, Yang, J, Wang, S, Matukumalli, LK and Da, Y 2011. Genome-wide association analysis of thirty one production, health, reproduction and body conformation traits in contemporary US Holstein cows. BMC Genomics 12, 408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darvasi, A and Soller, M 1997. A simple method to calculate resolving power and confidence interval of QTL map location behavior. Genetics 27, 125132.Google Scholar
Darvasi, A, Weinreb, A, Minke, V, Weller, JI and Soller, M 1993. Detecting marker-QTL linkage and estimating QTL gene effect and map location using a saturated genetic map. Genetics 134, 943951.Google ScholarPubMed
Druet, T and Georges, M 2010. A hidden Markov model combining linkage and linkage disequilibrium information for haplotype reconstruction and quantitative trait locus fine mapping. Genetics 184, 789798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Georges, M, Nielsen, D, Mackinnon, M, Mishra, A, Okimoto, R, Pasquino, AT, Sargeant, LS, Sorensen, A, Steele, MR, Zhao, X, Womack, JE and Hoeschele, I 1995. Mapping quantitative trait loci controlling milk production in dairy cattle by exploiting progeny testing. Genetics 139, 907920.Google ScholarPubMed
Grisart, B, Coppieters, W, Farnir, F, Karim, L, Ford, C, Berzi, P, Cambisano, N, Mni, M, Reid, S, Simon, P, Spelman, R, Georges, M and Snell, R 2002. Positional candidate cloning of a QTL in dairy cattle: identification of a missense mutation in the bovine DGAT1 gene with major effect on milk yield and composition. Genome Research 12, 222231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Illumina Inc 2011. BovineSNP50 Genotyping BeadChip. Retrieved April 4, 2013 from http://www.illumina.com/Documents/products/datasheets/datasheet_bovine_snp5O.pdf Google Scholar
Korol, AB, Ronin, YI and Kirzhner, VM 1995. Interval mapping of quantitative trait loci employing correlated trait complexes. Genetics 140, 11371147.Google ScholarPubMed
Lander, E and Kruglyak, L 1995. Genetic dissection of complex traits: guidelines for interpreting and reporting linkage results. Nature Genetics 11, 241247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lander, ES and Botstein, D 1989. Mapping Mendelian factors underlying quantitative traits using RFLP linkage maps. Genetics 121, 185199.Google ScholarPubMed
Lund, MS, Guldbrandtsen, B, Buitenhuis, AJ, Thomsen, B and Bendixen, C 2008. Detection of quantitative trait loci in Danish Holstein cattle affecting clinical mastitis, somatic cell score, udder conformation traits, and assessment of associated effects on milk yield. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 40284036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meuwissen, THE and Goddard, ME 2004. Mapping multiple QTL using linkage disequilibrium and linkage analysis information and multitrait data. Genetics Selection Evolution 36, 261279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meuwissen, THE, Karlsen, A, Lien, S, Olsaker, I and Goddard, ME 2002. Fine mapping of a quantitative trait locus for twinning rate using combined linkage and linkage disequilibrium mapping. Genetics 161, 373379.Google ScholarPubMed
Olsen, HG, Lien, S, Gautier, M, Nilsen, H, Roseth, A, Berg, PR, Sundsaasen, M, Svendsen, KK and Meuwissen, TH 2005. Mapping of a milk production QTL to a 420 kb region on bovine chromosome 6. Genetics 169, 275283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ron, M and Weller, JI 2007. From QTL to QTN identification in livestock – winning by points rather than knock-out: a review. Animal Genetics 38, 429439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ron, M, Feldmesser, E, Golik, M, Tager-Cohen, I, Kliger, D, Reiss, V, Domochovsky, R, Alus, O, Seroussi, E, Ezra, E and Weller, JI 2004. A complete genome scan of the Israeli Holstein population for quantitative trait loci by a daughter design. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 476490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS Institute Inc 2012. Base SAS® 9.3 Procedures Guide, 2nd edition, SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Seroussi, E, Glick, G, Shirak, A, Yakobson, E, Weller, JI, Ezra, E and Zeron, Y 2010. Analysis of copy loss and gain variations in Holstein cattle autosomes using BeadChip SNPs. BMC Genomics 11, 673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
VanRaden, P 2011. findhap.f90. Retrieved April 4, 2013 from http://aipl.arsusda.gov/software/findhap/ Google Scholar
VanRaden, PM and Wiggans, GR 1991. Derivation, calculation, and use of national animal model information. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 27372746.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
VanRaden, PM, Van Tassel, CP, Wiggans, GR, Sonstegard, TS, Schnabel, RD, Taylor, JF and Schenkel, FS 2009. Invited review: reliability of genomic predictions for North American Holstein bulls. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 1624.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Visscher, PM, Thompson, R and Haley, CS 1996. Confidence intervals in QTL mapping by bootstrapping. Genetics 143, 10131020.Google ScholarPubMed
Weller, JI 2007. Marker-assisted selection in dairy cattle. Marker-assisted selection: current status and future perspectives in crops, livestock, forestry and fish (ed. EP Guimarães, J Ruane, BD Scherf, A Sonnino and JD Dargie), 199228. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Weller, JI and Ron, M 2011. Invited review: quantitative trait nucleotide determination in the era of genomic selection. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 10821090.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weller, JI and Soller, M 2004. An analytical formula to estimate confidence interval of QTL location with a saturated genetic map as a function of experimental design. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 109, 12241229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weller, JI, Kashi, Y and Soller, M 1990. Power of daughter and granddaughter designs for determining linkage between marker loci and quantitative trait loci in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 73, 25252537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weller, JI, VanRaden, PM and Wiggans, GR 2013. Application of a posteriori granddaughter and modified granddaughter designs to determine Holstein haplotype effects. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 53765387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weller, JI, Weller, H, Kliger, D and Ron, M 2002. Estimation of quantitative trait locus allele frequency via a modified granddaughter design. Genetics 162, 841849.Google Scholar
Winter, A, Krämer, W, Werner, FAO, Kollers, S, Kata, S, Durstewitz, G, Buitkamp, J, Womack, JE, Thaller, G and Fries, R 2002. Association of a lysine-232/alanine polymorphism in a bovine gene encoding acyl-CoA:diacylglycerol acyltransferase (DGAT1) with variation at a quantitative trait locus for milk. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences USA 99, 93009305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Weller supplementary material 1

Weller supplementary material 1

Download Weller supplementary material 1(File)
File 658 KB
Supplementary material: File

Weller supplementary material 2

Weller supplementary material 2

Download Weller supplementary material 2(File)
File 626 KB
Supplementary material: File

Weller supplementary material 3

Weller supplementary material 3

Download Weller supplementary material 3(File)
File 699 KB
Supplementary material: File

Weller supplementary material 4

Weller supplementary material 4

Download Weller supplementary material 4(File)
File 201 KB

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Application of the a posteriori granddaughter design to the Holstein genome
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Application of the a posteriori granddaughter design to the Holstein genome
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Application of the a posteriori granddaughter design to the Holstein genome
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *