Planned Changes to Models and Trait Definitions

Paul VanRaden and John ColeAnimal Improvement Programs LaboratoryBeltsville, MD, [email protected]

2004

2004

2004

Planned Changes to Models and Trait

Definitions

S-1008 ANNUAL MEETING 2004 (2) P.M. VanRaden200

4200

4

November 2004 Changes

Pregnancy checks used in days open predictions (130-250 DIM)

Longevity for foreign Holstein bulls Single-trait longevity from Interbull Multi-trait processing at AIPL Foreign bull mean PL REL = 46% (was 38%), NM$ REL = 72% (was 71%)

15 countries (Other breeds Feb. 2005)


4200

4

2005 Trait and Model Changes

Adjust for past inbreeding (F) and expected future inbreeding (EFI)

Adjust for differing parity SD

Express yield PTA to 36-month age instead of mature equivalent

Use cow instead of bull base for DPR

Use 3.00 instead of breed means for SCS


4200

4

SCS Breed Means and Bases

SCS HOL JER BSW GUEAY

SMS

H

1995 3.10 3.31 3.09 3.212.9

33.0

3

2000 3.09 3.34 2.94 3.312.9

73.0

7

February 2005 base

3.00 3.00 3.00 3.003.0

03.0

0

PTA base change

-.11 -.32 -.05 -.23+.0

8-.05


4200

4

Daughter Pregnancy Rate Bases

PTA DPRHO

LJER

BSW

GUE

AYS

MSH

1995 cow mean

.4 .2 .6 -.3 -.1 .5

PTA progress -.1 -.1 -.2 -.2 .0 .0

PTA base change

-.3 -.1 -.4 +.5 +.1 -.5


4200

4

Inbreeding AdjustmentsVanRaden and Smith, 1999, JDS 82:2771

F (past inbrd.) and EFI (future inbrd.) Regression on F in animal model (PTA0)

PTAEFI = PTA0 + EFI * byield.F

Corr (current PTA, PTAEFI) = .9976

Genetic trend for PTAEFI is reduced Yield trend 6% less, DPR 14% lower, PL

25% lower, SCS becomes slightly unfavorable

Predict NM$EFI = NM$ + 7 (Fdaus) – 14 (EFI)


4200

4

Use in Mating Programs

Replace EFI with progeny F PA NM$ = (NM$sire + NM$dam)/2 Progeny merit = PA NM$ – 14 [Fprog - (EFIsire - EFIdam)/2]

Similar to calving ease NM$ includes average value of SCE

SCE has higher value for heifer matings, lower for cow matings


4200

4

Parity SD Adjustments

Multiplicative or additive adjustments? Neither makes variances quite equal Combined approach (Funk et al, 1991 JDS)

Lactation 1-5 deviations multiplied by [1.06 .99 .94 .89 .85] (milk, fat, protein) [ .97 .99 1.01 1.02 1.02] (SCS) [1.03 1.00 .98 .97 .96] (DPR)

Helps pass Interbull trend test 1 Corr (official, adjusted PTA) = .9998


4200

4

Age Adjustment for Yield PTA

Use 36 months vs. mature equivalent Standardized and actual means similar Age factors are estimated more precisely More fair when breed maturity rates differ

Proposed previously by USDA McDaniel (1973, JDS 56:959), Schutz (1994) Recommended by Holstein GAC, Oct 1994 Vetoed by Council in 1994 “to allow the

industry time to consider the nature and effect of such a change.”


4200

4

Breed SD and Maturity Rates Age factors from Schutz, 1994

Yield traits

HOL JER BSW GUE AYSMS

H

2000 SD / 1990 SD

1.11 1.18 1.12 1.051.0

51.0

5

ME / 24 mo

1.28 1.27 1.37 1.201.2

21.2

9

ME / 36 mo

1.10 1.10 1.15 1.051.1

01.1

5

Net change in PTA SD

1.02 1.06 .98 1.02 .95 .88


4200

4

Actual vs Standardized Means

(current CA data, all lactations)

Herd Averages Actual

36-month Equiv.

Mature Equiv.

Milk22,08

021,877 23,723

Fat 797 792 855

Protein 670 678 718


4200

4

Genetic Trend 1995-2000(cow birth year)

PTA HOL JERBSW GUE AYS

MSH

Net Merit

155 128 146 100 76 57

Prot (lbs)

19 16 16 12 8 6

Fat (lbs) 18 16 19 16 9 6

Milk (lbs)

592 442 479 420 259 225

Prod Life .3 .4 .4 .2 .2 .6

SCS .01 .01 -.04 .02 -.01 .02

DPR (%) -.1 -.1 -.2 -.2 .0 .0


4200

4

Calving Ease Changes (Feb. 2005)

Joint BSW-HOL evaluation (pending NAAB approval)

11,793 BSW, 3431 BSW-HOL calvings

12 million HOL calvings

Includes breed-of-MGS effect

Uses HOL (co)variance components and breed-specific bases


4200

4

Calving Ease Model Validation

Results passed Interbull trend validation

Joint BSW-HOL results compared to single-breed evaluations

Correlations showed BSW data did not adversely affect HOL results.


4200

4

Product-moment Correlations

Rank Correlations

Breed

Sire Sol

MGS

Sol

Sire

PDB

MGS

PDB

Sire Sol

MGS

Sol

Sire PDB

MGS

PDB

BSW .949.88

9.84

4.79

5.90

0.82

7.816

.779

HOL .999.99

9.99

9.99

9.99

9.99

9.992

.970

Within-breed vs Joint Evaluation


4200

4

Summary for Calving Ease

HOL BSW

Sire Calving Ease 8.3 ± 1.6 7.6 ± 1.1

Daughter Calving Ease

7.6 ± 1.1 5.9 ± 0.8

SCE Reliability 63.7 55.9

DCE Reliability 58.1 54.1


4200

4

Future Research

Genetic evaluation of crossbreds

Productive life trait definition Lactation length, yield correlations Trend tests prevent inbreeding adj.

Yield trait model improvements Mendelian sampling variance Persistency, rate of maturity


4200

4

Summary

Longevity from Interbull in Nov 2004

Brown Swiss calving ease in Feb 2005

Adjustments for inbreeding and for differing parity SD in Feb 2005

Age adjustment to 36 months instead of mature will affect breed means and SD


4200

4

Longevity Genetic Correlations

Interbull, Sept. 2004

USA

CAN

DEU

NLD

FRA

ITA GBR

USA

.88 .82 .79 .67 .72 .82

CAN

.88 .84 .75 .70 .75 .82

DEU

.82 .84 .80 .66 .77 .83

NLD

.79 .75 .80 .79 .70 .65

FRA

.67 .70 .66 .79 .67 .60

ITA .72 .75 .77 .70 .67 .70

GBR

.82 .82 .83 .65 .60 .70


4200

4

Sire Calving Ease Correlations

Interbull, Oct. 2004

USA

CAN

DEU

NLD

FRA

ITA DNK

USA

.76 .61 .78 .88 .66 .90

CAN

.76 .74 .76 .79 .74 .88

DEU

.61 .74 .70 .73 .61 .78

NLD

.78 .76 .70 .85 .61 .86

FRA

.88 .79 .73 .85 .72 .91

ITA .66 .74 .61 .61 .72 .78

DNK

.90 .88 .78 .86 .91 .78


4200

4

Daughter Calving Ease Correlations

Interbull, Oct. 2004

USA

CAN

DEU

NLD

FRA

ITA DNK

USA

.71 .68 .79 .90 .84 .77

CAN

.71 .87 .87 .72 .58 .91

DEU

.68 .87 .87 .58 .61 .80

NLD

.79 .87 .87 .75 .67 .84

FRA

.90 .72 .58 .75 .82 .77

ITA .84 .58 .61 .67 .82 .61

DNK

.77 .91 .80 .84 .77 .61

Planned Changes to Models and Trait Definitions

Documents

Transcript of Planned Changes to Models and Trait Definitions