BrownBagger October 29 2014 National Program for Genetic Improvement of Feed Efficiency in Beef Cattle www.BeefEfficiency.org.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding Conventional and Genomic EPDs
Advertisements

Animal Breeding Systems
West Virginia University Extension Service Genetics in Beef Cattle Wayne R. Wagner.
Meeting Consumer Demands through Genetic Selection: The NCBA Carcass Merit Project Dan W. Moser on behalf of the CMP Team.
Matt Spangler University of Nebraska- Lincoln DEVELOPMENT OF GENOMIC EPD: EXPANDING TO MULTIPLE BREEDS IN MULTIPLE WAYS.
Multiple Breed Evaluation Can MBE enhance crossbreeding? John Pollak Cornell University Director, NBCEC.
Imputation Matt Spangler University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Bob Weaber, Ph.D. Cow-Calf Extension Specialist Assistant Professor Dept. of Animal Sciences and Industry
Exploring Genotypes and Phenotypes of Longhorn Cattle Horns.
Unit B 4-4 Animal Science and The Industry. Problem Area 4 Understanding Animal Reproduction and Biotechnology.
Exploring Genotypes and Phenotypes of Longhorn Cattle.
Carcass EPD: Where are we, and where are we going? Dan W. Moser Dept. of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University.
Applying feed intake monitoring systems into producer testing programs Dr. Daryl R. Strohbehn Extension Beef Specialist Iowa Beef ISU.
Quantitative Genetics
Improvement of Beef Cow Biological Efficiency
BEEF CATTLE GENETICS By David R. Hawkins Michigan State University.
Training, Validation, and Target Populations Training, Validation, and Target Populations Mark Thallman, Kristina Weber, Larry Kuehn, Warren Snelling,
Beef Relationships using 50K Chip Information L.A. Kuehn, J.W. Keele, G.L. Bennett, T.G. McDaneld, T.P.L. Smith, W.M. Snelling, T.S. Sonstegard, and R.M.
Daryl Strohbehn, Ph.D. Emeritus Professor Iowa State University Bob Weaber, Ph.D. Ext. Cow-Calf Specialist Kansas State University.
Heterosis – The Forgotten Tool? Dr. Tom Field Colorado State University Dr. Andy Herring Texas A&M University Cattlemen’s College 2005 NCBA Meeting, San.
2 Iowa State University Dr. Dorian Garrick Dr. Stephanie Hansen Dr. Dan Loy Dr. J.R. Tait Texas A&M University Dr. Chris Seabury University of Illinois.
Matt Spangler Beef Genetics Specialist University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Principles of Selecting and Mating Farm Animals (Chapter 9) Genetic improvement of farm animals –Involves selection (choosing the best to be parents) –Involves.
Breeding and Genetics 101.
DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES 1 Discovering Genes for Beef Production Mike Goddard University of Melbourne and Department of Primary Indusries, Victoria.
Van Eenennaam 11/17/2010 Animal Genomics and Biotechnology Education Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D. Cooperative Extension Specialist Animal Biotechnology.
1 Application of Molecular Technologies in Beef Production Dan W. Moser, Ph.D Department of Animal Sciences and Industry Kansas State University, Manhattan.
Animal Genetics. Natural Selection n an organisms ability to SURVIVE and pass on its GENETIC information to its offspring.
1 Multi-Breed Evaluation For Growth Traits J. Keith Bertrand University of Georgia, Athens.
MBE, Update John Pollak Cornell University. Objectives Build a national pedigree file and database To achieve a unified national evaluation To migrate.
Multi-breed Evaluation J. Keith Bertrand University of Georgia, Athens.
Characterizing Change in the Beef Industry Justin W. Waggoner, Ph.D. Beef Systems Specialist Kansas State University Garden City, KS.
Commercial Ranch Project and DNA testing John Pollak Cornell University.
Genomics. Finding True Genetic Merit 2 Dam EPD Sire EPD Pedigree Estimate EPD TRUE Progeny Difference Mendelian Sampling Effect Adapted from Dr. Bob Weaber.
NBCEC BROWN BAGGER OCTOBER 8, 2014 Jack Ward AHA, Director of Breed Improvement.
Use of DNA information in Genetic Programs.. Next Four Seminars John Pollak – DNA Tests and genetic Evaluations and sorting on genotypes. John Pollak.
I DENTIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF ALLELES IMPAIRING HEIFER FERTILITY WHILE OPTIMIZING GENETIC GAIN IN CATTLE JF Taylor, DS Brown, MF Smith, RD Schnabel,
The Many Measures of Accuracy: How Are They Related? Matt Spangler, Ph.D. University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Selection of Breeding Program An S 426 Fall 2007.
Bob Weaber, Ph.D. Associate Professor/Cow-Calf Extension Specialist Kansas State University
Beef Cattle Production
Understanding Cattle Data Professor N. Nelson Blue Mountain Agriculture College.
EPD’s: What They Are and How to Use Them. Introduction EPDs = Expected Progeny Differences Progeny = Offspring, usually the offspring of the sire Differences.
Breeding Objectives for Terminal Sires Michael MacNeil USDA ARS Miles City, MT.
BSAA CD UNIT C Animal Science. Problem Area 1 Animal Genetics and Biotechnology.
Feed Efficiency Genetic Projects. Terms Gain/Feed = Feed Efficiency FE Feed/Gain = Feed Conversion FC: -FE Residual Feed Intake RFI Net Feed Intake NFI:-RFI.
Whole genome selection and the 2000 bull project at USMARC Larry Kuehn Research Geneticist.
Advanced Animal Breeding
Exploring Genotypes and Phenotypes of Longhorn Cattle.
Jack Ward American Hereford Association October 31, 2012.
 Genes- located on chromosomes, control characteristics that are inherited from parents.  Allele- an alternative form of a gene (one member.
Principles of Agricultural Science – Animal 1. 2 Heritability and the Environment Principles of Agricultural Science – Animal Unit 7 – Lesson 7.2 Predicting.
Evaluation & Use of Expected Progeny Differences in Beef Cattle Dr. Fred Rayfield Livestock Specialist Georgia Agricultural Education To accompany lesson.
Beef Cattle Production
Exploring Genotypes and Phenotypes of Longhorn Cattle Horns
Use of DNA information in Genetic Programs.
Evaluation & Use of Expected Progeny Differences in Beef Cattle
Genetics: Analysis and Principles
Exploring Mendelian Genetics
MENDEL AND THE GENE IDEA Gregor Mendel’s Discoveries
Recombination (Crossing Over)
Keith Vander Velde UW Extension
Update on Multi-Breed Genetic Evaluation
Using recombination to maintain genetic diversity
MENDEL AND THE GENE IDEA Gregor Mendel’s Discoveries
History of Selection From Phenotypes to Economic Indexes
Unit 9: Evolution 9.5 Genes and Variation.
Expected Progeny Difference EPD
A population shares a common gene pool.
The Basic Genetic Model
Presentation transcript:

BrownBagger October National Program for Genetic Improvement of Feed Efficiency in Beef Cattle

Suppose we generate 100 progeny on 1 bull Sire Progeny

Performance of the Progeny Sire Progeny +30 lb +15 lb -10 lb + 5 lb +10 lb Offspring of one sire exhibit more than ¾ diversity of the entire population

We learn about parents from progeny Sire Progeny +30 lb +15 lb -10 lb + 5 lb +10 lb Sire EPD +8-9 lb (EPD is “shrunk”)

Suppose we generate new progeny Sire Progeny Sire EPD +8-9 lb Expect them to be 8-9 lb heavier than those from an average sire Some will be more others will be less but we cant tell which are better without “buying” more information

Four Datasets Hereford Cattle fed at Olsens (HD) – 847 animals in 10 contemporary groups F1 2 composites fed at USMARC (50k) – 1,160 animals in 15 contemporary groups (+9) Legacy Simmental cattle fed at Illinois (HD) – 1,444 animals in 202 contemporary groups Legacy Angus cattle fed at Circle A (HD) – 1,580 animals in 102 contemporary groups

Dry Matter Intake StudyGenetic VarResidual VarHeritability Hereford USMARC Simmental Angus

Mid-test Metabolic Weight StudyGenetic VarResidual VarHeritability Hereford USMARC Simmental Angus

Gain on Test StudyGenetic VarResidual VarHeritability Hereford USMARC Simmental Angus

Residual Feed Intake StudyGenetic VarResidual VarHeritability Hereford USMARC Simmental Angus

Background Feed Intake (FI), required along with output production measures to characterize efficiency, is heritable but not cost-effective or practical for routine measurement across the national spectrum of seedstock and commercial cattle

Chromosomes are a sequence of base pairs Cattle usually have 30 pairs of chromosomes One member of each pair was inherited from the sire, one from the dam Each chromosome has about 100 million base pairs (A, G, T or C) About 3 billion describe the animal Part of 1 pair of chromosomes Blue base pairs represent genes Yellow represents the strand inherited from the sire Orange represents the strand inherited from the dam

EPD is half sum of average gene effects Blue base pairs represent genes Sum=+2 Sum=+8 EPD=

Consider 3 Bulls EPD= 5 EPD= -3 EPD= 1 Below-average bulls will have some above-average alleles and vice versa!

Goal Predict components of feed efficiency in animals without phenotypic data based on knowledge of their genome

Approach Develop prediction equations based on joint analyses of phenotypic and genomic data – Variety of breeds and diets etc Apply those prediction equations to new animals – Validate predictions

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Occasionally (30%) one or other chromosome is passed on intact e.g

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Typically (40%) one crossover produces a new recombinant gamete Recombination can occur anywhere but there are “hot” spots and “cold” spots

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Sometimes there may be two (20%) or more (10%) crossovers Never close together

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Possible offspring chromosome inherited from one parent Interestingly the number of crossovers varies between sires and is heritable On average 1 crossover per chromosome per generation

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Consider a small window of say 1% chromosome (1 Mb)

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Offspring mostly (99%) segregate blue or red (about 1% are admixed) “Blue” haplotype (eg sires paternal chromosome) “Red” haplotype (eg sires maternal chromosome)

Alleles are inherited in blocks paternal maternal Chromosome pair Offspring mostly (99%) segregate blue or red (about 1% are admixed) -4 “Blue” haplotype (eg sires paternal chromosome) “Red” haplotype (eg sires maternal chromosome) +4

Major Gene Results Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS) Genomic regions or Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) accounting for ≥ 1% genetic variance

Across-breed Prospects Across-breed prediction requires having the same gene/feature causing variation in different breeds And having a marker that can identify the favorable allele(s) regardless of breed

Across-breed Prospects Across-breed prediction requires having the same gene/feature causing variation in different breeds And having a marker that can identify the favorable allele(s) regardless of breed ✔

Across-breed Prospects Across-breed prediction requires having the same gene/feature causing variation in different breeds And having a marker that can identify the favorable allele(s) regardless of breed ✔ ✗

Industry Roll out Angus (AAA) – Use Residual Average Daily Gain (RADG) EPD predicted from intake and growth information as well as genomic information Hereford (AHA) – Prototype EPD based on measured DMI that will include genomic information in the near future Simmental (and its affiliate breeds) – Red Angus, Gelbvieh, Limousin, Maine Anjou, Shorthorn etc) – Current DMI EPD used in indexes that is based on predicted DMI from production phenotypes and will include measured DMI and genomic information in future

Summary This multi-institutional 5-Year national project is – Undertaking basic and applied research related to identifying factors that improve feed efficiency – Extending its findings to stakeholders using a variety of communication approaches – Implementing its discoveries within the context of the beef industry infrastructure

35 Iowa State University Dr. Dorian Garrick Dr. Stephanie Hansen Dr. Dan Loy Dr. J.R. Tait Texas A&M University Dr. Chris Seabury University of Illinois Dr. Jon Beever Dr. Dan Faulkner Dr. Dan Shike University of Minnesota Dr. Scott Fahrenkrug University of Missouri Dr. Jerry Taylor, Project Director Dr. Monty Kerley Dr. Robert Schnabel Kansas State University Dr. Robert Weaber University of Nebraska Dr. Matt Spangler GeneSeek, A Neogen Company Dr. Daniel Pomp USDA-BELTSVILLE Dr. Tad Sonstegard USDA-US MARC Dr. Harvey Freetly Dr. John Pollak Washington State University Dr. Kris Johnson Dr. Holly Neibergs Iowa State University Dr. Dorian Garrick Dr. Stephanie Hansen Dr. Dan Loy Dr. J.R. Tait Texas A&M University Dr. Chris Seabury University of Illinois Dr. Jon Beever Dr. Dan Faulkner Dr. Dan Shike University of Minnesota Dr. Scott Fahrenkrug University of Missouri Dr. Jerry Taylor, Project Director Dr. Monty Kerley Dr. Robert Schnabel Kansas State University Dr. Robert Weaber University of Nebraska Dr. Matt Spangler GeneSeek, A Neogen Company Dr. Daniel Pomp USDA-BELTSVILLE Dr. Tad Sonstegard USDA-US MARC Dr. Harvey Freetly Dr. John Pollak Washington State University Dr. Kris Johnson Dr. Holly Neibergs 20 investigators 10 institutions