Cargando…
Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle
The improvement of carcass traits is an important breeding objective in beef cattle breeding programs. The most common way of selecting for improvement in carcass traits is via indirect selection using ultrasound scanning of selection candidates which are submitted to genetic evaluation programs. Tw...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7963028/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33748681 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab011 |
_version_ | 1783665559529848832 |
---|---|
author | Duff, C J van der Werf, J H J Parnell, P F Clark, S A |
author_facet | Duff, C J van der Werf, J H J Parnell, P F Clark, S A |
author_sort | Duff, C J |
collection | PubMed |
description | The improvement of carcass traits is an important breeding objective in beef cattle breeding programs. The most common way of selecting for improvement in carcass traits is via indirect selection using ultrasound scanning of selection candidates which are submitted to genetic evaluation programs. Two systems used to analyze ultrasound images to predict carcass traits are the Pie Medical Esaote Aquila (PIE) and Central Ultrasound Processing (CUP). This study compared the ability of the two systems to predict carcass traits for genetic evaluation in Australian Angus cattle. Genetic and phenotypic parameters were estimated using data from 1,648 Angus steers which were ultrasound scanned twice with both systems, first at feedlot entry and then following 100 d in the feedlot. The traits interpreted from ultrasound scanning included eye muscle area (EMA), rib fat (RIB) rump fat (RUMP), and intramuscular fat (IMF). Abattoir carcass data were collected on all steers following the full feedlot feeding period of 285 d. For all ultrasound scan traits, CUP resulted in higher phenotypic and genetic variances compared to the PIE. For IMF, CUP had higher heritability at feedlot intake (0.51 for CUP compared to 0.37 for PIE) and after 100 d feeding (0.54 for CUP compared to 0.45 PIE). CUP predicted IMF also tended to have stronger correlations with the breeding objective traits of carcass IMF and marbling traits, both genetically (ranging from 0.59 to 0.75 for CUP compared to 0.45–0.63 for PIE) and phenotypically (ranging from 0.27 to 0.43 for CUP compared to 0.19–0.28 for PIE). Ultrasound scan EMA was the only group of traits in which the heritabilities were higher for PIE (0.52 for PIE compared to 0.40 for CUP at feedlot intake and 0.46 for PIE compared to 0.43 for CUP at 100 d of feeding), however with similar relationships to the breeding objective carcass EMA observed. For subcutaneous fat traits of ultrasound RIB and RUMP, the heritabilites and genetic correlations to the related carcass traits were similar, with the exception being the higher heritability observed for CUP predicted RUMP at feedlot intake at 0.52 compared to 0.38 for PIE. The results from this study indicates that the CUP system, compared to PIE, provides an advantage for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle, particularly for the IMF and associated marbling traits. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7963028 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79630282021-03-19 Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle Duff, C J van der Werf, J H J Parnell, P F Clark, S A Transl Anim Sci Animal Genetics and Genomics The improvement of carcass traits is an important breeding objective in beef cattle breeding programs. The most common way of selecting for improvement in carcass traits is via indirect selection using ultrasound scanning of selection candidates which are submitted to genetic evaluation programs. Two systems used to analyze ultrasound images to predict carcass traits are the Pie Medical Esaote Aquila (PIE) and Central Ultrasound Processing (CUP). This study compared the ability of the two systems to predict carcass traits for genetic evaluation in Australian Angus cattle. Genetic and phenotypic parameters were estimated using data from 1,648 Angus steers which were ultrasound scanned twice with both systems, first at feedlot entry and then following 100 d in the feedlot. The traits interpreted from ultrasound scanning included eye muscle area (EMA), rib fat (RIB) rump fat (RUMP), and intramuscular fat (IMF). Abattoir carcass data were collected on all steers following the full feedlot feeding period of 285 d. For all ultrasound scan traits, CUP resulted in higher phenotypic and genetic variances compared to the PIE. For IMF, CUP had higher heritability at feedlot intake (0.51 for CUP compared to 0.37 for PIE) and after 100 d feeding (0.54 for CUP compared to 0.45 PIE). CUP predicted IMF also tended to have stronger correlations with the breeding objective traits of carcass IMF and marbling traits, both genetically (ranging from 0.59 to 0.75 for CUP compared to 0.45–0.63 for PIE) and phenotypically (ranging from 0.27 to 0.43 for CUP compared to 0.19–0.28 for PIE). Ultrasound scan EMA was the only group of traits in which the heritabilities were higher for PIE (0.52 for PIE compared to 0.40 for CUP at feedlot intake and 0.46 for PIE compared to 0.43 for CUP at 100 d of feeding), however with similar relationships to the breeding objective carcass EMA observed. For subcutaneous fat traits of ultrasound RIB and RUMP, the heritabilites and genetic correlations to the related carcass traits were similar, with the exception being the higher heritability observed for CUP predicted RUMP at feedlot intake at 0.52 compared to 0.38 for PIE. The results from this study indicates that the CUP system, compared to PIE, provides an advantage for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle, particularly for the IMF and associated marbling traits. Oxford University Press 2021-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7963028/ /pubmed/33748681 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab011 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Animal Genetics and Genomics Duff, C J van der Werf, J H J Parnell, P F Clark, S A Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle |
title | Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle |
title_full | Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle |
title_fullStr | Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle |
title_short | Comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in Angus cattle |
title_sort | comparison of two live-animal ultrasound systems for genetic evaluation of carcass traits in angus cattle |
topic | Animal Genetics and Genomics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7963028/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33748681 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab011 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT duffcj comparisonoftwoliveanimalultrasoundsystemsforgeneticevaluationofcarcasstraitsinanguscattle AT vanderwerfjhj comparisonoftwoliveanimalultrasoundsystemsforgeneticevaluationofcarcasstraitsinanguscattle AT parnellpf comparisonoftwoliveanimalultrasoundsystemsforgeneticevaluationofcarcasstraitsinanguscattle AT clarksa comparisonoftwoliveanimalultrasoundsystemsforgeneticevaluationofcarcasstraitsinanguscattle |