Date post: | 24-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | teresa-green |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Selection and Application – Making More Profitable Holsteins (male selection)
North American Perspective
Marjorie Faust and Katie OlsonUSA
Making More Profitable Holsteins with Genomics What is the current state of the science?
How is the technology being applied and used in the US?
What are the challenges and opportunities for genomics going forward to ensure that Holsteins can deliver on producers’ demands for production efficiency & value for money?
Making and Delivering More Profitable Holsteins
Tremendous progress has been achieved in the US through industry cooperation and collaboration, pre-genomics and now into the genomic era– Milk recording organizations – DHI, Milk Testing Labs, DPRCs– Genetic Evaluation Unit – USDA-AIPL– Cooperative Extension– Breed Associations– Dairy Breeders– Universities– AI Organizations
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Birth Year
Bree
ding
Val
ue -
Prot
ein,
kg
190
210
230
250
270
290
310
330
350
370
390
Prot
ein
Yiel
d, k
g
SiresCowsProtein Yield
Genomic Evaluations in North America
Released publicly in 2009 Rapid adoption into breeding programs
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
Jul-09 Jan-10 Aug-10 Feb-11 Sep-11 Apr-12 Oct-12 May-13
Genomic Evaluation, mo-yr
Num
ber G
enot
yped
, cum
ulati
ve
Total FemalesYoung FemalesTotal MalesYoung Males
USDA-AIPL, 2012
>68,000 males
>230,000 both sexes
Reliability for Genomic Evaluations in the US Young sires have always been a good source of
genetics and by 2012, genomics provide more accurate (but still imperfect) tools for identifying the best of the best
Trait Traditional GenomicGenomic-Traditional*
Protein Yield 35 75 +40Productive Life, mo. 26 72 +46Somatic Cell Score 30 76 +45Daughter Pregnancy Rate, % 26 71 +45Type Final Score 32 75 +42Calving Ease 33 57 +24
* Based on results from 44,950 Holstein young bulls.
Availability of gPTAs– Updated monthly– If male and <2 years of age, lists are not publicly available– Lists for proven bulls 3x per year
How are genomic evaluations being used?– Females
• 25-30% of genotypes are 50k or larger chip• Used for female culling and management• Used for breeding purposes, including bull-dam selection
– Males• ~90% of genotypes are 50k or larger chip• Use for screening is increasing
Application of Genomic Evaluations in the US
Young bulls as sires of sons– Pre-genomics ~10% or lower– By 2012, ~40% and growing– For bull calves born in 2011, sires are 23 months younger than for bull
calves born in 2006
Bull dams– Pre-genomics: Dominated by 2-year old cows and older– Post-genomics:
• Many more heifer contracts• More ownership of females by AI companies• More contracts to heifers out of young sires• More flushing of heifers, and IVF work with pre-puberty heifers• By 2012, genomic estimates drive value in elite breeding programs –
currently, the race is for the big numbers!
Impact of Genomics on Bull Selection Decisions
With the increase in the use of young bulls, there has been a concurrent increase in the number of sires of AI candidate bulls
Is this a true increase in sire families represented? Is the intent to find outcrosses or spread risk? Finding high ranking outcrosses still a challenge
Will semen sales also reflect an increase in sire families represented? Does this represent a real trend that will continue?
More Sires Represented in AI Candidate Bull Populations
126
82 82 89
0 2
62
187
020406080
100120140160180200
2008 2009 2010 2011Num
ber
of
Sire
s fo
r C
and
idat
e B
ulls
Birth Year of Young BullsUSDA-AIPL, 2012
Proven Bulls
Young Bulls
30-50% of inseminations to young bulls represent traditional Progeny Test Use of proven bulls has declined from ~70% to 50% of inseminations First crop bull usage has declined and been replaced by young bulls What will farmers demand? Where will young/proven bull usage
stabilize?
US Holstein Breeding Programs Using More Young SiresTo
tal I
nsem
inat
ion
s
Year of InseminationUSDA-AIPL, 2012
08
3642 48
2822
31
0
2
23
4039
38
54
29
4 310 11 15 13 1115
7 2 2 1
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Balancing the Economics of Increased Young Sire Usage
“Why would I pay $30 for older bulls when I can get high rankinggenomic young bulls for $15 per dose?” (US Dairy Breeder comment, Oct 2012)
– Semen price tends to be lower than proven bulls of equal genetic merit– Supply and demand should fix this but hasn’t done so in ~4 years
AI companies still working through strategies to produce young sire product– Young sires produce much lower volume of semen than proven bulls– Market life is shorter (no “branding” of bulls; faster turnover)– For same volume of semen sales, need more production stalls– More bulls required to produce product may reduce selection intensity
Acquisition cost per bull up ~50%-100% and climbing rapidly – More leases on extreme bulls (breeder retains ownership)– More bonus potential on extreme bulls
Production costs per dose of semen are considerably higher for young bulls
By 2010-2011, essentially all major US AI organizations scaledback on progeny test programs in one form or another– Several companies significantly reduced number of bulls sampled– Others reduced bull numbers and doses of progeny test semen
distributed per bull– Bull numbers appear to have rebounded recently, possibly to meet
market demands for more doses of product?
Collection of Breed Association linear type data on young sire progeny has evolved with genomics (Holstein Pulse, Summer 2011 and 2012)– >20% drop in the number of young sire daughters evaluated– Fewer sires represented, but many more progeny for some bulls
AI companies still progeny testing bulls, but this may change– Potential reduction in amount of phenotypic data (type)– Decision will largely be driven by farmer demand for proven bulls
Impact of Genomics on Progeny Test Programs
4 Years into Genomic Era – Is there value in progeny data?
460
480
500
520
540
560
580
600
April 2010 August 2012
Genomic Evaluation, mo-yr
Net
Mer
it, $
Young BullsProven Bulls
NM$ results for top 100 young and proven bulls from April 2010 Evaluation No change in NM$ formula over this time period For high ranking young bulls, PA & gPA overestimated daughter performance Progeny and performance data continue to add necessary information
High quality data are necessary for accurate, reliable evaluations. Current methodology requires unselected and unbia1sed data
As the industry continues to evolve, how do industry players share responsibility for ensuring that sufficient high quality data are collected?
The Challenge of Collecting Data in the Genomics Era ...“Fewer sires represented, but many more progeny for some bulls” (Holstein Pulse, Summer 2011 and 2012)
NameAug-09 TPISM
Aug-12 TPISM Herds Dtrs
Aug-09 PTAT
Aug-12 PTAT Dtrs-Type
PINE-TREE MARTHA SHOLTEN - ET 2216 1802 267 631 2.93 1.13 103MS ATLEES SHT AFTERSHOCK - ET 2270 1809 244 410 4.95 3.32 105GILLETTE JOB 2075 1746 240 349 3.14 1.4 293BADGER ONESHOT - ET 2069 1778 168 262 3.35 1.44 214LANGS-TWIN-B JANUARY - ET 2004 1830 124 248 2.92 1.72 135DE-SU GILLESPY - ET 2277 2157 144 227 4.15 2.68 176LADYS-MANOR RUBY D SHOUT - ET 2107 1920 111 201 3.42 2.06 159A-L-H ANTONIO - ET 1960 1665 83 168 3.55 1.75 77MOUNTFIELD MELVILLE - ET 1869 1802 58 96 2.46 1.72 68HILROSE FREELANCE TACOMA - ET 1611 1499 59 85 3.14 1.72 42
Challenges and Opportunities of Genomics for Inbreeding
Who is related to who? Success story for genomics! Who should be the parents of the next generation – balancing genetic
progress and inbreeding? Jury is still out on the impact of genomics. After selection, who should be mated to who? Genomic tools offer promise.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Birth Year
Inbr
eedi
ng, %
InbreedingExpected Future Inbreeding
1990
Across time, more traits and a wider range of traits included– Many newer traits are more challenging for making genetic progress
Broadening the Selection Goal for Holstein Profitability
Net Merit $1980
1980sTPI℠
1990sTPI℠
Today’sTPI℠
Production
Non-Production
Opportunity Presented by Low Heritability Traits
Traits with low heritability have always presented a challenge for making more profitable Holsteins
Making measurable progress quickly is more difficult because it is challenging to identify the best parents on a genetic level
-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Birth Year
Bree
ding
Val
ue -
SCS
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Som
atic
Cell
Scor
e
SiresCowsSCS
Challenge of Making Faster Genetic Progress
History teaches that even lowly heritable traits respond to intense selection on correlated traits – for example, genetic decline in fitness traits resulting from single trait selection on production traits
Are we measuring and monitoring all of the important/correlated traits?
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Birth Year
Bree
ding
Val
ue -
DPR
, %
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Dau
ghte
r Pre
gnan
cy R
ate,
%
CowsSiresDaughter Pregnancy Rate
Challenge and Opportunity of Genomics for New Traits
What traits need to be protected when selecting for traits like efficiency? Think of genomics as providing a Formula 1 race car. Driving a Formula 1 race
car can get us to the destination faster, but a crash at 150 miles/hour is considerably more painful than a crash at 20 miles/hour
Efficiency
Intake
Production, fertility, growth, immunity, etc.
As an industry, how do we share the responsibility of investingin the collection of high quality, unselected and unbiased data?
– Necessary to recalibrate SNP effects (SNP key)– Minimize time gap between real data and selection candidates– Include data on families that are most relevant to the candidate group– Needed for selection traits and correlated traits which need to be
protected
Methodology solutions needed in next steps of genomics developments– Improved comparability across age groups for both sexes
• Rankings within age groups do not appear to be biased, but more difficult to compare genetic rankings across age groups
– Dampening or minimizing the impact of potential bias from female side– Avoiding bias which arises from genomic pre-selection– Need the help of genetic evaluation units and academia
Challenges and Opportunities in the Genomic Era
Genomics is providing more accurate (but still imperfect) toolsfor identifying the best of the best at a younger age
As genomic tools have been improved, more emphasis on younger and younger parents and grandparents of both sexes– Seeing use of young sires pre-release in IVF done with pre-puberty
heifers out of young sires (3 generations removed from performance data)
– For breeding programs, less concern with reliability than in the past
Genetic diversity continues to require attention for both sexes– Genomics can be both beneficial and detrimental for genetic diversity– Must protect against real risks of increasing inbreeding via genomics
Continued methodology improvements and developments needed to ensure that genomic technologies remain both accurate and useful
Conclusions
For AI companies, lots of cost going in, but not reflected inincreased revenue (yet)– Semen price tends to be lower than proven bulls of equal genetic merit– Current option for AI companies is to cut cost. No PT. Less data
Driving the Formula 1 race car of genomics can get us to the destination faster, but a crash at 150 miles/hour is considerably more painful than a crash at 20 miles/hour– Progeny and performance data continue to add necessary information– The need to invest in phenotypic data is not shrinking, but growing and
expanding
Producers demand production efficiency & value for money, and the industry shared responsibility is to make sure that Holsteins can deliver!
Conclusions