Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T04:56:40.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The evaluation of sires from progeny test data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

E. P. Cunningham
E. P. Cunningham
Affiliation:
An Foras Talúntais, DunsineaCastleknock, Co.Dublin, Eire
Get access

Summary

The extraction of sire proofs from non-orthogonal field data of the type met with in cattle A.I. populations presents special problems.

A weighted least squares procedure for the estimation of sire effects from data of this kind, cross-classified by sire and herd, is described. Expected Breeding Values computed from these estimates have certain optimum properties. The standard errors of the estimates of the Expected Breeding Values are derived. The method makes it possible to classify the sires into groups before the proofs are computed. This sub-division of the stud could be useful in young sire evaluation and in measuring genetic trends in the proven stud. The computations are readily programmed for a computer, and the assumptions involved in the use of the method are particularly well suited to A.I. progeny field data, especially where an annual draft of young sires is being tested. A worked example is given.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , June 1965 , pp. 221 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Cunningham, E. P., 1962. Estimation of genetic and phenotypic parameters in a beef cattle population. Ph.D. thesis. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar
Heidhues, T., Vanvleck, L. D., & Henderson, C. R., 1961. Actual and expected accuracy of sire proofs under the New York system of sampling bulls. Z. Tierz. Züchtbiol., 75: 323–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, C. R., 1952. Specific and general combining ability. In Heterosis. (Ed., Gowen, J. W.), Iowa State College Press, Ames, Ia., pp. 352–370.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R., 1963. Selection index and expected genetic advance. In Statistical genetics and plant breeding. Publ. nat. Res. Coun. nat. Acad. Sci. [Wash.]. No. 982: 141–163.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R., Carter, H. W., & Godfrey, J. T., 1954. Use of the contemporary herd average in appraising progeny tests of dairy bulls. J. Anim. Sci., 13: 959. (Soc. Proc.)Google Scholar
MacArthur, A. T. G., 1954. The assessment of progeny tests of dairy bulls made under farm conditions. Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod., 1954, pp. 75–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
New Zealand Dairy Board, 1958. Herd improvement. 34th Rep. N.Z. Dairy Bd. pp. 70–107.Google Scholar
Robertson, Alan, 1960. The progeny testing of dairy bulls—a comparison of tests on father and son. J. agric. Sci., 54: 100–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanVleck, L. D., Wadell, L. H., & Henderson, C. R., 1961. Components of variance associated with milk and fat records of artificially sired Holstein daughters. J. Anim. Sci., 20: 812–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar