Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Genetic parameters of calving ease using sire-maternal grandsire model in Korean Holsteins

  • Alam, Mahboob (Animal Breeding and Genetics Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Dang, Chang Gwon (Animal Breeding and Genetics Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Choi, Tae Jeong (Swine Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Choy, Yun Ho (Animal Breeding and Genetics Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Jae Gu (Dairy Cattle Genetic Improvement Center) ;
  • Cho, Kwang Hyeon (Department of Beef & Dairy Science, Korea National College of Agriculture and Fisheries)
  • Received : 2016.04.25
  • Accepted : 2017.04.11
  • Published : 2017.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Calving ease (CE) is a complex reproductive trait of economic importance in dairy cattle. This study was aimed to investigate the genetic merits of CE for Holsteins in Korea. Methods: A total of 297,614 field records of CE, from 2000 to 2015, from first parity Holstein heifers were recorded initially. After necessary data pruning such as age at first calving (18 to 42 mo), gestation length, and presence of sire information, final datasets for CE consisted of 147,526 and 132,080 records for service sire calving ease (SCE) and daughter calving ease (DCE) evaluations, respectively. The CE categories were ordered and scores ranged from CE1 to CE5 (CE1, easy; CE2, slight assistance; CE3, moderate assistance; CE4, difficult calving; CE5, extreme difficulty calving). A linear transformation of CE score was obtained on each category using Snell procedure, and a scaling factor was applied to attain the spread between 0 (CE5) and 100% (CE1). A sire-maternal grandsire model analysis was performed using ASREML 3.0 software package. Results: The estimated direct heritability ($h^2$) from SCE and DCE evaluations were $0.11{\pm}0.01$ and $0.08{\pm}0.01$, respectively. Maternal $h^2$ estimates were $0.05{\pm}0.02$ and $0.04{\pm}0.01$ from SCE and DCE approaches, respectively. Estimates of genetic correlations between direct and maternal genetic components were $-0.68{\pm}0.09$ (SCE) and $-0.71{\pm}0.09$ (DCE). The average direct genetic effect increased over time, whereas average maternal effect was low and consistent. The estimated direct predicted transmitting ability (PTA) was desirable and increasing over time, but the maternal PTA was undesirable and decreasing. Conclusion: The evidence on sufficient genetic variances in this study could reflect a possible selection improvement over time regarding ease of calving. It is expected that the estimated genetic parameters could be a valuable resource to formulate sire selection and breeding plans which would be directed towards the reduction of calving difficulty in Korean Holsteins.

Keywords

References

  1. Dekkers JCM. Optimal breeding strategies for calving ease. J Dairy Sci 1994;77:3441-53. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)77287-8
  2. Carnier P, Albera A, Dal Zotto R, et al. Genetic parameters for direct and maternal calving ability over parities in Piedmontese cattle. J Anim Sci 2000;78:2532-9. https://doi.org/10.2527/2000.78102532x
  3. Meijering A. Dystocia and stillbirth in cattle a review of causes, relations and implications. Livest Prod Sci 1984;11:143-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-6226(84)90057-5
  4. Meijering A. Dystocia in dairy cattle breeding with special attention to sire evaluation for categorical traits [Ph.D. thesis]. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University; 1986.
  5. Eriksson S, Naisholm A, Johansson K, Philipsson J. Genetic parameters for calving difficulty, stillbirth, and birth weight for Hereford and Charolais at first and later parities. J Anim Sci 2004;82:375-83. https://doi.org/10.2527/2004.822375x
  6. Jamrozik J, Fatehi J, Kistemaker GJ, Schaeffer LR. Estimates of genetic parameters for Canadian Holstein female reproduction traits. J Dairy Sci 2005;88:2199-208. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72895-2
  7. Lopez de Maturana E, Ugarte E, Komen J, van Arendonk JAM. Consequences of selection for yield traits on calving ease performance. J Dairy Sci 2007;90:2497-505. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-415
  8. Wiggans GR, Cole JB, Thornton LLM. Multiparity evaluation of calving ease and stillbirth with separate genetic effects by parity. J Dairy Sci 2008;91:3173-8. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0981
  9. Snell EJ. A scaling procedure for ordered categorical data. Biometrics 1964 20:592-607. https://doi.org/10.2307/2528498
  10. Mujibi FDN, Crews DH. Genetic parameters for calving ease, gestation length, and birth weight in Charolais cattle. J Anim Sci 2009;87:2759-66. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1141
  11. Gianola D. Theory and analysis of threshold characters. J Anim Sci 1982;54:1079-96. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1982.5451079x
  12. Phocas F, Laloe D. Evaluation models and genetic parameters for calving difficulty in beef cattle. J Anim Sci 2003;81:933-8. https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.814933x
  13. Gilmour AR, Gogel BJ, Cullis BR, Thompson R. ASReml user guide release 3.0 [Internet] Hemel Hempstead, HP1, 1ES, UK: VSN International Ltd, c2008 [cited 2017 Mar 30]. Available from: www.vsni.co.uk
  14. Misztal I, Gianola D, Foulley JL. Computing aspects of a nonlinear method of sire evaluation for categorical data. J Dairy Sci 1989;72:1557-68. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79267-5
  15. Wiggans GR, Misztal I, Van Tassell CP. Calving ease (Co)variance components for a sire-maternal grandsire threshold model. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:1845-8. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73771-0
  16. Hickey JM, Keane MG, Kenny DA, et al. Heterogeneity of genetic parameters for calving difficulty in Holstein Heifers in Ireland. J Dairy Sci 2007;90:3900-8. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-717
  17. Cole JB, Goodling RC, Jr., Wiggans GR, Vanraden PM. Genetic evaluation of calving ease for Brown Swiss and Jersey bulls from purebred and crossbred calvings. J Dairy Sci 2005;88:1529-39. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72822-8
  18. Eaglen SA, Bijma P. Genetic parameters of direct and maternal effects for calving ease in Dutch Holstein-Friesian cattle. J Dairy Sci 2009;92:2229-37. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1654
  19. Weller JI, Ron M. Genetic analysis of fertility traits in Israeli Holsteins by linear and threshold models. J Dairy Sci 1992;75:2541-8. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)78016-3
  20. Steinbock L, Nasholm A, Berglund B, Johansson K, Philipsson J. Genetic effects on stillbirth and calving difficulty in Swedish Holsteins at first and second calving. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:2228-35. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73813-2
  21. Heringstad B, Chang YM, Svendsen M, Gianola D. Genetic analysis of calving difficulty and stillbirth in Norwegian red cows. J Dairy Sci 2007;90:3500-7. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-792
  22. Luo MF, Boettcher PJ, Dekkers JCM, Schaeffer LR. Bayesian analysis for estimation of genetic parameters of calving ease and stillbirth for Canadian Holsteins. J Dairy Sci 1999;82:1848-58.
  23. Weigel K. Daughter and service sire calving ease- there's new help to avoid calving ease problems [Internet]. Breeders Journal; c2002 [cited 2017 Mar 30]. Available from: http://usa.absglobal.com/tech_serv/resources/resourcefiles/dairy/CalvingEasearticle.pdf
  24. Robinson DL. Models which might explain negative correlations between direct and maternal genetic effects. Livest Prod Sci 1996;45:111-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-6226(96)00002-4
  25. Phocas F, Sapa J. Genetic parameters for growth, reproductive performance, calving ease and suckling performance in beef cattle heifers. J Anim Sci 2004;79:41-8.
  26. Hansen M, Misztal I, Lund MS, Pedersen J, Christensen LG. Undesired phenotypic and genetic trend for stillbirth in Danish Holsteins. J Dairy Sci 2004;87:1477-86. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73299-3
  27. Dhakal K, Maltecca C, Cassady JP, et al. Calf birth weight, gestation length, calving ease, and neonatal calf mortality in Holstein, Jersey, and crossbred cows in a pasture system. J Dairy Sci 2013;96:690-8. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-5817
  28. Cole JB, Wiggans GR, VanRaden PM, Miller RH. Stillbirth (co)variance components for a sire-maternal grandsire threshold model and development of a calving ability index for sire selection. J Dairy Sci 2007;90:2489-96. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-436
  29. Gutierrez JP, Goyache F, Fernandez I, Alvarez I, Royo LJ. Genetic relationships among calving ease, calving interval, birth weight, and weaning weight in the Asturiana de los Valles beef cattle breed. J Anim Sci 2007;85:69-75. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-168
  30. Matilainen K, Mrode R, Stranden I, Thompson R, Mantysaari EA. Linear-threshold animal model for birth weight, gestation length and calving ease in United Kingdom Limousin beef cattle data. Livest Sci 2009;122:143-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.08.006