Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:03:42.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Additive response to selection adjusted for effects of inbreeding in a closed dairy cattle nucleus assuming a large number of gametes per female

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2016

I. J. M. de Boer  and
J. A. M. van Arendonk
I. J. M. de Boer
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Agricultural University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. A. M. van Arendonk
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Agricultural University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

Inbreeding leads to reduction of the additive variance, whereas inbreeding depression reduces the performance of milk producing cows in both the nucleus and the commercial population. In this study, the cumulative additive response to 30 years of selection corrected for variance reduction due to inbreeding and inbreeding depression in the commercial cow population (denoted as expected phenotypic level or P) was evaluated in a closed (1024 cows tested per year) dairy cattle nucleus scheme, assuming a large number of gametes available per female. No dominance effects were simulated nor estimated in the nucleus. Various hierarchical and factorial designs with fewer sires than dams, an equal number of sires and dams, or even a larger number of sires than dams were compared for P. The trait considered was overall economic merit for milk production with a heritability of the unselected base population of 0·30. Sires and dams were selected on their animal model estimated additive effect for the trait considered at either 15 or 27 months of age. All full-sibs were available for selection. In the absence of inbreeding depression, a complete factorial scheme with more sires than dams resulted in the highest P. With increasing inbreeding depression, the optimal number of sires increased relatively more than the optimal number of dams. Increasing the number of sires decreased inbreeding relatively more than increasing the number of dams, and resulted in a relatively higher P. This is due to the fact that correlations between estimated additive effects of male selection candidates are higher than between those of female selection candidates.

Keywords

dairy cattleembryo cultureinbreedingselection.
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , April 1994 , pp. 173 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

Balaine, D. S., Pearson, R. E. and Miller, R. H. 1981. Profit functions in dairy cattle and effect of measures of efficiency and prices. Journal of Dairy Science 64: 87–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belonsky, G. M. and Kennedy, B. W. 1988. Selection on individual phenotype and best linear unbiased prediction of breeding value in a closed swine herd. Journal Animal Science 66: 1124–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boer, I. J. M. de and Arendonk, J. A. M. van 1992. Prediction of additive and dominance effects in selected or unselected populations with inbreeding. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 84: 451–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulmer, M. G. 1980. The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Dempfle, L. 1990. Statistical aspects of design of animal breeding programs: a comparison among various selection strategies. In Advances in statistical methods for genetic improvement of livestock (ed. Gianola, D. and Hammond, K.), pp. 98–117. Springer-Verlag, Berling Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekkers, J. C. M. 1989. Economie evaluation of breeding programs for commercial artificial insemination organizations in dairy cattle. Doctoral Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
Dekkers, J. C. M. 1992. Structure of breeding programs to capitalize on reproductive technology for genetic improvement. Journal of Dairy Science 75: 2880–2891.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. 1989. Introduction to quantitative genetics. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Goddard, M. E. and Smith, C. 1990a. Optimum number of bull sires in dairy cattle breeding. Journal of Dairy Science 73: 1113–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, M. E. and Smith, C. 1990b. Adjustment of sires' estimated breeding values for their prospective inbreeding impact on the breed. Journal of Dairy Science 73: suppl. 1, p. 223.Google Scholar
Kinghorn, B. P., Smith, C. and Dekkers, J. C. M. 1991. Potential genetic gains in dairy cattle with gamete harvesting and in vitro fertilisation. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 611–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruip, Th. A. M., Boni, R.Roelofsen, M. W. M., Wurth, Y. A. and Pieterse, M. C. 1993. Application of OPU for embryo production and breeding in cattle. Theriogenology 39: 251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibfried-Rutledge, M. L., Critser, E. S., Parrish, J. J. and First, N. L. 1989. In vitro maturation and fertilization of bovine oocytes. Theriogenology 31: 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1989. A deterministic model for the optimization of dairy cattle breeding based on BLUP breeding value estimates. Animal Production 49: 193–202.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1990. The effect of the size of MOET nucleus dairy cattle breeding plans on the genetic gain and its variance. Proceedings of the fourth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Edinburgh, vol. XIV, pp. 271–274.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1991. Reduction of selection differentials in finite populations with a nested full-half sib family structure. Biometrics 47: 195–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meuwissen, T. H. E. and Woolliams, J. A. 1993. Required effective sizes of livestock populations. Theoretical and Applied Genetics In press.Google Scholar
Nicholas, F. W. and Smith, C.. 1983. Increased rates of genetic change in dairy cattle by embryo transfer and splitting. Animal Production 36: 341–353.Google Scholar
Quaas, R. L. 1988. Additive genetic model with groups and relationships. Journal of Dairy Science 71: 1338–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roo, G. de. 1988. Studies on breeding schemes in a closed pig population. Doctoral thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ruane, J. 1991. The effect of alternative mating designs and selection strategies on adult multiple ovulation and embryo transfer (MOET) nucleus breeding schemes in dairy cattle. Genetics Selection and Evolution 23: 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, L. R. and Kennedy, B. W. 1986. Computing solutions to mixed model equations. Proceedings of the third world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Lincoln, vol. XII, pp. 382–393.Google Scholar
Schans, A. van der, Rens, B. T. T. M. van, Westerlaken, L. A. J. van der and Wit, A. A. C. de. 1992. Bovine embryo production by repeated transvaginal oocyte collection and in vitro fertilization. Proceedings of the twelfth international congress on animal reproduction. The Hague, The Netherlands, vol. 3, pp. 1366–1368.Google Scholar
Schrooten, C. and Arendonk, J. A. M. van. 1992. Stochastic simulation of dairy cattle breeding schemes: genetic evaluation of nucleus size and type. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 109: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tier, B. 1990. Computing inbreeding coefficients quickly. Genetics Selection and Evolution 22: 419–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toro, M. and Pérez-Enciso, M. 1990. Optimization of selection response under restricted inbreeding. Genetics Selection and Evolution 22: 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westell, R. A., Quaas, R. L. and Van Vleck, L. D. 1988. Genetic groups in an animal model. Journal of Dairy Science 71: 1310–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolliams, J. A. 1989. Modifications to MOET nucleus breeding schemes to improve rates of genetic progress and decrease rates of inbreeding in dairy cattle. Animal Production 49: 1–14.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A. and Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1993. Decision rules and variance of response in breeding schemes. Animal Production 56: 179–186.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A. and Wilmut, I. 1989. Embryo manipulation in cattle breeding and production. Animal Production 48: 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, N. R. 1989. Consequences of selection in closed populations with special reference to closed nucleus herds of pigs. Doctoral Thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.Google Scholar