Premium
Overview of genetic evaluation in dairy cattle
Author(s) -
TOGASHI Kenji,
LIN Ching Yonn,
YOKOUCHI Kunio
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
animal science journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.606
H-Index - 38
eISSN - 1740-0929
pISSN - 1344-3941
DOI - 10.1111/j.1740-0929.2004.00187.x
Subject(s) - best linear unbiased prediction , sire , selection (genetic algorithm) , statistics , trait , random effects model , mathematics , covariance , progeny testing , econometrics , computer science , biology , artificial intelligence , medicine , zoology , meta analysis , programming language
It is costly and time‐consuming to carry out dairy cattle selection on a large experimental scale. For this reason, sire and cow evaluations are almost exclusively based on field data, which are highly affected by a large array of environmental factors. Therefore, it is crucial to adjust for those environmental effects in order to accurately estimate the genetic merits of sires and cows. Index selection is a simple extension of the ordinary least squares under the assumption that the fixed effects are assumed known without error. The mixed‐model equations (MME) of Henderson provide a simpler alternative to the generalized least squares procedure, which is computationally difficult to apply to large data sets. Solution to the MME yields the best linear unbiased estimator of the fixed effects and the best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP) of the random effects. In an animal breeding situation, the random effects such as sire or animal represent the animal's estimated breeding value, which provides a basis for selection decision. The BLUP procedure under sire model assumes random mating between sires and dams. The genetic evaluation procedure has progressed a long way from the dam‐daughter comparison method to animal model, from single trait to multiple trait analysis, and from lactational to test‐day model, to improve accuracy of evaluations. Multiple‐trait evaluation appears desirable because it takes into account the genetic and environmental variance‐covariance of all traits evaluated. For these reasons, multiple‐trait evaluation would reduce bias from selection and achieve a better accuracy of prediction as compared to single‐trait evaluation. The number of traits included in multiple‐trait evaluation should depend upon the breeding goal. Recent advances in molecular and reproductive technologies have created great potential for quantitative geneticists concerning genetic dissection of quantitative traits, and marker‐assisted genetic evaluation and selection.