[en] Nonadditive genetic effects are currently ignored in national genetic evaluations of farm animals because of ignorance of the level of dominance variance for traits of interest and the difficult computational problems involved. Potential gains from including the effects of dominance in genetic evaluations include “purification” of additive values and availability of predictions of specific combining abilities for each pair of prospective parents. This study focused on making evaluation with dominance effects feasible computationally and on ascertaining benefits of such an evaluation for dairy cattle, beef cattle, and swine. Using iteration on data, computing costs for evaluation with dominance effects included costs could be less than twice expensive as with only an additive model. With Method Â, variance components could be estimated for problems involving up to 10 millions equations. Dominance effects accounted for up to 10% of phenotypic variance; estimates were larger for growth traits. As a percentage of additive variance, the estimate of dominance variance reached 78% for 21-d litter weight of swine and 47% for post weaning weight of beef cattle. When dominance effects are ignored, additive evaluations are “contaminated”; effects are greatest for evaluations of dams in a single large family. These changes in ranking were important for dairy cattle, especially for dams of full-sibs, but were less important for swine. Specific combining abilities cannot be included in sire evaluations and need to be computed separately for each set of parents. The predictions of specific combining abilities could be used in computerized mating programs via the Internet. Gains from including the dominance effect in genetic evaluations would be moderate but would outweigh expenditures to produce those evaluations.
Disciplines :
Genetics & genetic processes Animal production & animal husbandry
Author, co-author :
Misztal, I.; University of Georgia, Athens, United States
Varona, L.; University of Georgia, Athens, United States
Culbertson, M.; University of Georgia, Athens, United States, Cotswold USA, Alden, CA, United States
Bertrand, J.K.
Mabry, J.; University of Georgia, Athens, United States
Lawlor, T. J.; Holstein Association of America, Brattleboro, VT, United States
Van Tassel, C. P.; Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, United States
Gengler, Nicolas ; Université de Liège > Agronomie, Bio-ingénierie et Chimie (AgroBioChem) > Zootechnie
Language :
English
Title :
Studies on the value of incorporating the effect of dominance in genetic evaluations of dairy cattle, beef cattle and swine
Alternative titles :
[fr] Étude de l’intérêt de l’incorporation de l’effet de dominance dans l’évaluation génétique des bovins laitiers, Des bovines viandeux et des porcs
Publication date :
1998
Journal title :
Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement
ISSN :
1370-6233
eISSN :
1780-4507
Publisher :
Presses Agronomiques de Gembloux, Gembloux, Belgium
Boswerger BHG., Lawlor TJ., Allaire FR. (1994). Expected progeny production gain by balancing inbreeding depression and selection. J. Dairy Sci. 77 (Suppl.1), p. 201.
Cockerham CC. (1954). An extension of the concept of partitioning hereditary variance for analysis of variance when epistasis is present. Genetics 39, p. 859–882.
Culbertson MS., Mabry J W., Misztal I., Gengler N., Bertrand JK., Varona L. (1997). Estimation of dominance variance in purebred Yorkshire swine. J. Anim. Sci. 76, p. 448–451
de Boer IJM., Hoeschele I. (1993). Genetic evaluation methods for populations with dominance and inbreeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 86, p. 245–258.
De Stefano AL., Hoeschele I. (1992). Utilization of dominance variance through mate allocation strategies. J. Dairy Sci. 75, p. 1680–1690.
Gengler N., Misztal I., Bertrand JK. (1997a). Relationships between estimates of heterosis and dominance variance for post-weaning gain in US Limousin cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 75 (Suppl. 1), p. 149.
Gengler N., Van Vleck LD., MacNeil MD., Misztal I., Pariacote FA. (1997b). Influence of dominance relationships on the estimation of dominance variance with sire-dam subclass effects. J. Anim. Sci. 7 5, p. 2885–2891.
Gengler N., Misztal I., Bertrand JK., Culbertson M S. (1998). Estimation of the dominance variance for postweaning gain in the US Limousin population. J. Anim. Sci. 76, p. 2515–2520.
Henderson CR. (1984). Applications of linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, Canada. ISBN 0-88955-030-1.
Henderson CR. (1985). Best linear unbiased prediction of nonadditive genetic merits in noninbred populations. J. Anim. Sci. 60, p. 111–117.
Henderson CR. (1989). Prediction of merits of potential matings from sire-maternal grandsire models with nonadditive genetic effects. J. Dairy Sci. 7 2, p. 2592–2605.
Hoeschele I., VanRaden PM. (1991). Rapid inversion of dominance relationship matrices for noninbred populations by including sire by dam subclass effects. J. Dairy Sci. 74, p. 557–569.
Lawlor TJ., Weigel KA., Misztal I. (1993). Implications of incorporating inbreeding information into animal model evaluations for type. J. Dairy Sci. 76 (Suppl. 1), p. 292.
Lawlor TJ., Klei L., Misztal I., Varona L. (1998). Managing inbreeding and utilizing dominance effects in a herd mating program. J. Dairy Sci. 81 (Suppl. 1) (in press).
Misztal I. (1995). Feasibility of a large-scale evaluation with the dominance effect. J. Dairy Sci. 78 (Suppl. 1), p. 247.
Misztal I. (1997). Estimation of variance components with l a rge-scale dominance models. J. Dairy Sci. 80, p. 965–974.
Misztal I., Gianola D. (1987). Indirect solution of mixed model equations. J. Dairy Sci. 70, p. 716–723.
Misztal I., Fernando RL., Grossman M., Lawlor T J., Lukaszewicz M. (1995). Dominance and epistatic effects in genetic evaluation of farm animals. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 13, p. 251–266.
Misztal I., Lawlor TJ., Gengler N. (1997). Relationships among estimates of inbreeding depression, dominance and additive variance for linear traits in Holsteins. Genet. Sel. Evol. 29, p. 319–326.
Misztal I, Varona L., Culbertson M., Gengler N., Bertrand JK., Mabry J., Lawlor TJ., Van Tassell C P. (1998). Studies on the value of incorporating effect of dominance in genetic evaluations of dairy cattle, beef cattle, and swine. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 25, p. 513–516.
Reverter A., Golden BL., Bourdon RM. (1994). Method  variance components procedure: application on the simple breeding value model. J. Anim. Sci. 72, p. 2247–2253.
Uimari P., Kennedy B W. (1990). Mixed model methodology to estimate additive and dominance genetic values under complete dominance and inbreeding. Proc. 4th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 13, p. 297–300.
Van Raden PM., Lawlor TJ., Short TH., Hoeschele I. (1992). Use of reproductive technology to estimate variances and predict effects of gene interactions. J. Dairy Sci. 75, p. 2892–2901.
Varona L., Misztal I. (1998). Prediction of parental dominance combinations for planned matings. Methodology and simulation results. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 25, p. 593–596.
Varona L., Misztal I., Bertrand JK., Lawlor TJ. (1998). Effect of full-sibs on additive breeding values under the dominance model for stature in United States Holsteins. J. Dairy Sci. 81, p. 1126–1135.
