Cargando…

Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle

BACKGROUND: Dairy cattle production systems are mostly based on purebreds, but recently the use of crossbreeding has received increased interest. For genetic evaluations including crossbreds, several methods based on single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) have been proposed, i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mei, Quanshun, Liu, Huiming, Zhao, Shuhong, Xiang, Tao, Christensen, Ole F
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10022181/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36932324
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-023-00792-4
_version_ 1784908673127022592
author Mei, Quanshun
Liu, Huiming
Zhao, Shuhong
Xiang, Tao
Christensen, Ole F
author_facet Mei, Quanshun
Liu, Huiming
Zhao, Shuhong
Xiang, Tao
Christensen, Ole F
author_sort Mei, Quanshun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Dairy cattle production systems are mostly based on purebreds, but recently the use of crossbreeding has received increased interest. For genetic evaluations including crossbreds, several methods based on single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) have been proposed, including metafounder ssGBLUP (MF-ssGBLUP) and breed-specific ssGBLUP (BS-ssGBLUP). Ideally, models that account for breed effects should perform better than simple models, but knowledge on the performance of these methods is lacking for two-way crossbred cattle. In addition, the differences in the estimates of genetic parameters (such as the genetic variance component and heritability) between these methods have rarely been investigated. Therefore, the aims of this study were to (1) compare the estimates of genetic parameters for average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) between these methods; and (2) evaluate the impact of these methods on the predictive ability for crossbred performance. METHODS: Bivariate models using standard ssGBLUP, MF-ssGBLUP and BS-ssGBLUP for the genetic evaluation of ADG and FCR were investigated. To measure the predictive ability of these three methods, we estimated four estimators, bias, dispersion, population accuracy and ratio of population accuracies, using the linear regression (LR) method. RESULTS: The results show that, for both ADG and FCR, the heritabilities were low with the three methods. For FCR, the differences in the estimated genetic parameters were small between the three methods, while for ADG, those estimated with BS-ssGBLUP deviated largely from those estimated with the other two methods. Bias and dispersion were similar across the three methods. Population accuracies for both ADG and FCR were always higher with MF-ssGBLUP than with ssGBLUP, while with BS-ssGBLUP the population accuracy was highest for FCR and lowest for ADG. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that in the genetic evaluation for crossbred performance in a two-way crossbred cattle production system, the predictive ability of MF-ssGBLUP and BS-ssGBLUP is greater than that of ssGBLUP, when the estimated variance components are consistent across the three methods. Compared with BS-ssGBLUP, MF-ssGBLUP is more robust in its superiority over ssGBLUP. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12711-023-00792-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10022181
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100221812023-03-18 Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle Mei, Quanshun Liu, Huiming Zhao, Shuhong Xiang, Tao Christensen, Ole F Genet Sel Evol Research Article BACKGROUND: Dairy cattle production systems are mostly based on purebreds, but recently the use of crossbreeding has received increased interest. For genetic evaluations including crossbreds, several methods based on single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) have been proposed, including metafounder ssGBLUP (MF-ssGBLUP) and breed-specific ssGBLUP (BS-ssGBLUP). Ideally, models that account for breed effects should perform better than simple models, but knowledge on the performance of these methods is lacking for two-way crossbred cattle. In addition, the differences in the estimates of genetic parameters (such as the genetic variance component and heritability) between these methods have rarely been investigated. Therefore, the aims of this study were to (1) compare the estimates of genetic parameters for average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) between these methods; and (2) evaluate the impact of these methods on the predictive ability for crossbred performance. METHODS: Bivariate models using standard ssGBLUP, MF-ssGBLUP and BS-ssGBLUP for the genetic evaluation of ADG and FCR were investigated. To measure the predictive ability of these three methods, we estimated four estimators, bias, dispersion, population accuracy and ratio of population accuracies, using the linear regression (LR) method. RESULTS: The results show that, for both ADG and FCR, the heritabilities were low with the three methods. For FCR, the differences in the estimated genetic parameters were small between the three methods, while for ADG, those estimated with BS-ssGBLUP deviated largely from those estimated with the other two methods. Bias and dispersion were similar across the three methods. Population accuracies for both ADG and FCR were always higher with MF-ssGBLUP than with ssGBLUP, while with BS-ssGBLUP the population accuracy was highest for FCR and lowest for ADG. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that in the genetic evaluation for crossbred performance in a two-way crossbred cattle production system, the predictive ability of MF-ssGBLUP and BS-ssGBLUP is greater than that of ssGBLUP, when the estimated variance components are consistent across the three methods. Compared with BS-ssGBLUP, MF-ssGBLUP is more robust in its superiority over ssGBLUP. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12711-023-00792-4. BioMed Central 2023-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10022181/ /pubmed/36932324 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-023-00792-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mei, Quanshun
Liu, Huiming
Zhao, Shuhong
Xiang, Tao
Christensen, Ole F
Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
title Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
title_full Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
title_fullStr Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
title_full_unstemmed Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
title_short Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
title_sort genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10022181/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36932324
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-023-00792-4
work_keys_str_mv AT meiquanshun genomicevaluationfortwowaycrossbredperformanceincattle
AT liuhuiming genomicevaluationfortwowaycrossbredperformanceincattle
AT zhaoshuhong genomicevaluationfortwowaycrossbredperformanceincattle
AT xiangtao genomicevaluationfortwowaycrossbredperformanceincattle
AT christensenolef genomicevaluationfortwowaycrossbredperformanceincattle