Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Effect of cow reference group on validation reliability of genomic evaluation

  • M. Koivula (a1), I. Strandén (a1), G. P. Aamand (a2) and E. A. Mäntysaari (a1)
Abstract

We studied the effect of including genomic data for cows in the reference population of single-step evaluations. Deregressed individual cow genetic evaluations (DRP) from milk production evaluations of Nordic Red Dairy cattle were used to estimate the single-step breeding values. Validation reliability and bias of the evaluations were calculated with four data sets including different amount of DRP record information from genotyped cows in the reference population. The gain in reliability was from 2% to 4% units for the production traits, depending on the used DRP data and the amount of genomic data. Moreover, inclusion of genotyped bull dams and their genotyped daughters seemed to create some bias in the single-step evaluation. Still, genotyping cows and their inclusion in the reference population is advantageous and should be encouraged.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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 sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.

      Effect of cow reference group on validation reliability of genomic evaluation
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send 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 use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Effect of cow reference group on validation reliability of genomic evaluation
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send 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 use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Effect of cow reference group on validation reliability of genomic evaluation
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
E-mail: minna.koivula@luke.fi
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

I Aguilar , I Misztal , DL Johnson , A Legarra and S Tsuruta 2010. Hot topic, a unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 743752.

OF Christensen and MS Lund 2010. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genetics Selection Evolution 42, 2.

HS Daetwyler , R Pong-Wong , B Villanueva and JA Woolliams 2010. The impact of genetic architecture on genome-wide evaluation methods. Genetics 185, 10211031.

R Dassonneville , A Baur , S Fritz , D Boichard and V Ducrocq 2012. Inclusion of cow records in genomic evaluations and impact on bias due to preferential treatment. Genetics Selection Evolution 44, 40.

M Goddard 2009. Genomic selection, prediction of accuracy and maximisation of long term response. Genetica 136, 245257.

ME Goddard and BJ Hayes 2009. Mapping genes for complex traits in domestic animals and their use in breeding programmes. Nature Reviews Genetics 10, 381391.

M Koivula , I Strandén , J Pösö , GP Aamand and EA Mäntysaari 2015. Single-step genomic evaluation using multitrait random regression model and test-day data. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 27752784.

MT Kuhn , PJ Boettcher and AE Freeman 1994. Potential biases in predicted transmitting abilities of females from preferential treatment. Journal of Dairy Science 77, 24282437.

M Lidauer , J Pösö , J Pedersen , J Lassen , P Madsen , EA Mäntysaari , US Nielsen , J-Å Eriksson , K Johansson , T Pitkänen and I Strandén 2015. Across-country test-day model evaluations for Holstein, Nordic Red Cattle, and Jersey. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 12961309.

T Meuwissen , B Hayes and M Goddard 2013. Accelerating improvement of livestock with genomic selection. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences 1, 221237.

I Misztal , A Legarra and I Aguilar 2009. Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 46484655.

I Misztal , S Tsuruta , I Aguilar , A Legarra , PM VanRaden and TJ Lawlor 2013. Methods to approximate reliabilities in single-step genomic evaluation. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 647654.

I Strandén and M Lidauer 1999. Solving large mixed models using preconditioned conjugate gradient iteration. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 27792787.

G Su , RF Brøndum , P Ma , B Guldbrandtsen , GP Aamand and MS Lund 2012a Comparison of genomic predictions using medium-density (~54000) and high-density (~777,000) single nucleotide polymorphism marker panels in Nordic Holstein and Red Dairy Cattle populations. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 46574665.

G Su , P Madsen , US Nielsen , EA Mäntysaari , GP Aamand , OF Christensen and MS Lund 2012bGenomic prediction for the Nordic Red Cattle using one-step and selection index blending approaches. Journal of Dairy Science. 95, 909917.

JR Thomasen , AC Sørensen , MS Lund and B Guldbrandtsen 2014. Adding cows to the reference population makes a small dairy population competitive. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 58225832.

S Tsuruta , I Misztal , I Aguilar and TJ Lawlor 2011. Multiple-trait genomic evaluation of linear type traits using genomic and phenotypic data in US Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 41984204.

S Tsuruta , I Misztal , I Aguilar and TJ Lawlor 2013. Genomic evaluations of final score for US Holsteins benefit from the inclusion of genotypes on cows. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 33323335.

PM VanRaden 2008. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 44144423.

PM VanRaden , CP Van Tassell , GR Wiggans , TS Sonstegard and RD Schnabel 2009. Invited review, reliability of genomic predictions for North American Holstein bulls. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 1624.

GR Wiggans , TA Cooper , PM VanRaden and JB Cole 2011. Technical note, adjustment of traditional cow evaluations to improve accuracy of genomic predictions. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 61886193.

ML Makgahlela , EA Mäntysaari , I Strandén , M Koivula , US Nielsen , MJ Sillanpää and J Juga 2013. Across breed multi-trait random regression genomic predictions in the Nordic Red dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 130, 1019.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

animal
  • ISSN: 1751-7311
  • EISSN: 1751-732X
  • URL: /core/journals/animal
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 49
Total number of PDF views: 206 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 455 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 19th September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.