1 / 16

N. Gengler 1,2 , G.R. Wiggans *,3 , J.R. Wright 3 , and T. Druet 1,2

Simultaneous accounting for heterogeneity of (co)variance components in genetic evaluation of type traits. N. Gengler 1,2 , G.R. Wiggans *,3 , J.R. Wright 3 , and T. Druet 1,2 1 Gembloux Agricultural University, Belgium 2 National Fund for Scientific Research, Brussels, Belgium

nolan-house
Download Presentation

N. Gengler 1,2 , G.R. Wiggans *,3 , J.R. Wright 3 , and T. Druet 1,2

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Simultaneous accounting for heterogeneity of (co)variance components in genetic evaluation of type traits N. Gengler1,2, G.R. Wiggans*,3, J.R. Wright3, and T. Druet1,2 1 Gembloux Agricultural University, Belgium 2 National Fund for Scientific Research, Brussels, Belgium 3 Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD

  2. USDA Type evaluation • Breeds: • Ayrshire • Brown Swiss • Guernsey • Jersey • Milking Shorthorn • Red and White • 15 Linear traits and Final Score • Multi-trait Model • Canonical Transformation • Estimation of missing values

  3. Heterogeneity of (co)variance • Variances and (co)variances assumed constant across herds and time • Holstein Association accounts for heterogeneity in final score • Variance tends to decrease with increasing herd average final score • Changes in appraisal program over time can be a cause

  4. Methods of HV estimation • Holstein Association estimates phenotypic variance using combination • observed variance • predicted variance from model including • mean final score • registry status • number of appraisals for herd-classification date • Meuwissen proposed simultaneous estimation of variances and breeding values • expected to improve accuracy of both estimates

  5. USDA HV adjustment system • Apply Canonical transformation to linear traits • Prepare data for 2 models • score= herd-sire + herd-year-season-parity + parity-time_period-age + parity-time_period-stage • var= mean + parity-group_size + parity-herd_mean_final_score + parity-year-season + herd-year-month

  6. Variance model • Herd-year-month effect in variance model random • Regression of variances within parity toward population mean (fixed effects) • Method R estimation of variance ratios within each EBV iteration

  7. Computational requirements

  8. Iteration • Time increased due to • iteration for variance model • estimation of variance ratios • Convergence sensitive to • quality of the starting values • size of unknown parent groups • Ways of reducing processing time • parallel processing • using a faster computer • limiting iteration for variances

  9. Correlations between HV-adjusted official evaluations • February 2001 official evaluations • 2497 Jersey AI bulls born 1980+ • All correlations .989 or higher

  10. Change in slope of PTA for Jersey AI bulls

  11. Differences between HV-adjusted and official evaluation • Standard deviations & mean absolute values • increased as reliabilities increased to 80% • decreased slightly for reliabilities of > 90% • Mean differences largest for bulls • born from 1985 through 1994 • with lowest mean daughters final scores

  12. Mendelian sampling • Mendelian sampling • evaluation minus mean of parent evaluations • Jersey cows born from 1984 through 1998 • regression of SD on birth year

  13. Mendelian sampling

  14. Interbull trend validation • Trend tests conducted for • Stature • Udder support • Comparison • first parity v. all parities • without recent years v. all data • Trend differences within tolerance

  15. HV model implementation plans • Jersey - May 2001 • Other breeds by Feb 2002

  16. Conclusions • Simultaneous estimation of BV & Variances possible • Requires substantially more computer time • Improves stability of Mendelian Sampling Variance over time • HV adjusted EBV enable more accurate selection decisions

More Related