Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T12:21:58.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic parameters for producer-recorded health data in Canadian Holstein cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2011

T. F.-O. Neuenschwander ,
F. Miglior ,
J. Jamrozik ,
O. Berke ,
D. F. Kelton  and
L. R. Schaeffer
T. F.-O. Neuenschwander
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry Science, Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
F. Miglior
Affiliation:
Guelph Food Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 5C9 Canadian Dairy Network, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1K 1E5
J. Jamrozik*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry Science, Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
O. Berke
Affiliation:
Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
D. F. Kelton
Affiliation:
Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
L. R. Schaeffer
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry Science, Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Health traits are of paramount importance for economic dairy production. Improvement in liability to diseases has been made with better management practices, but genetic aspects of health traits have received less attention. Dairy producers in Canada have been recording eight health traits (mastitis (MAST), lameness (LAME), cystic ovarian disease (COD), left displaced abomasum (LDA), ketosis (KET), metritis (MET), milk fever (MF) and retained placenta (RP)) since April 2007. Genetic analyses of these traits were carried out in this study for the Holstein breed. Edits on herd distributions of recorded diseases were applied to the data to ensure a sufficient quality of recording. Traits were analysed either individually (MAST, LAME, COD) or were grouped according to biological similarities (LDA and KET, and MET, MF and RP) and analysed with multiple-trait models. Data included 46 104 cases of any of the above diseases. Incidence ranged from 2.3% for MF to 9.7% for MAST. MET and KET also had an incidence below 4.0%. Variance components were estimated using four different sire threshold models. The differences between models resulted from the inclusion of days at risk (DAR) and a cow effect, in addition to herd, parity and sire effects. Models were compared using mean squared error statistic. Mean squared error favoured, in general, the sire and cow within sire model with regression on DAR included. Heritabilities on the liability scale were between 0.02 (MET) and 0.21 (LDA). There was a moderate, positive genetic correlation between LDA and KET (0.58), and between MET and RP (0.79).

Keywords

dairy cattlehealth traitsbinary modelsgenetic parameters
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , April 2012 , pp. 571 - 578
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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

Abdel-Azim, GA, Freeman, AE, Kehrli, ME, Kelm, SC, Burton, JL, Kuck, AL, Schnell, S 2005. Genetic basis and risk factors for infectious and non-infectious diseases in US Holsteins. I. Estimation of genetic parameters for single diseases and general health. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1199–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benzaquen, ME, Risco, CA, Archibald, LF, Melendez, P, Thatcher, MJ, Thatcher, WW 2007. Rectal temperature, calving-related factors, and the incidence of puerperal metritis in postpartum cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2804–2814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Haas, Y, Barkema, HW, Veerkamp, RF 2002. Genetic parameters of pathogen-specific incidence of clinical mastitis in dairy cows. Animal Science 74, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Distl, O, Ron, M, Francos, G, Mayer, E, Kraeusslich, H 1991. Genetic analysis of reproductive disorders in Israeli Holstein dairy cows. Theriogenology 35, 827–836.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gianola, D, Foulley, LF 1983. Sire evaluation for ordered categorical data with a threshold model. Genetics Selection Evolution 15, 201–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goff, JP, Horst, RL 1997. Physiological changes at parturition and their relationship to metabolic disorders. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1260–1268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harville, DA, Mee, RW 1984. A mixed model procedure for analyzing ordered categorical data. Biometrics 40, 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heringstad, B 2010. Genetic analysis of fertility-related diseases and disorders in Norwegian Red cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 2751–2756.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heringstad, B, Klemetsdal, G, Ruane, J 2000. Selection for mastitis resistance in dairy cattle: a review with focus on the situation in the Nordic countries. Livestock Production Science 64, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heringstad, B, Chang, YM, Gianola, D, Klemetsdal, G 2003. Genetic analysis of longitudinal trajectory of clinical mastitis in first-lactation Norwegian cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2676–2683.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heringstad, B, Chang, YM, Gianola, D, Klemetsdal, G 2005. Genetic analysis of clinical mastitis, milk fever, ketosis, and retained placenta in three lactations of Norwegian red cows. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 3273–3281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooijer, GA, Lubbers, RBF, Ducro, BJ, van Arendonk, JAM, Kaal-Lansbergen, LMTE, van der Lende, T 2001. Genetic parameters for cystic ovarian disease in Dutch black and white dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 286–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kadarmideen, HN, Thompson, R, Simm, G 2000. Linear and threshold model genetic parameters for disease, fertility and milk production in dairy cattle. Animal Science 71, 411–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelton, DF, Lissemore, KD, Martin, RE 1998. Recommendations for recording and calculating the incidence of selected clinical diseases of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 2502–2509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koeck, A, Egger-Danner, C, Fuerst, C, Obritzhauser, W, Fuerst-Waltl, B 2010. Genetic analysis of reproductive disorders and their relationship to fertility and milk yield in Austrian Fleckvieh dual-purpose cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 2185–2194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, HK, Oltenacu, PA, van Vleck, LD, Erb, HN, Smith, RD 1989. Heritabilites of and genetic correlations among six health problems in Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 180–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäntysaari, EA, Gröhn, YT, Quaas, RL 1993. Repeatability and heritability of lactational occurrence of reproductive disorders in dairy cows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 17, 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matos, CA, Thomas, DL, Gianola, D, Perez-Enciso, M, Young, LD 1997. Genetic analysis of discrete reproductive traits in sheep using linear and nonlinear models: II. Goodness of fit and predictive ability. Journal of Animal Science 75, 88–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Misztal, I, Tsuruta, S, Strabel, T, Auvray, B, Druet, T, Lee, DH 2002. BLUPF90 and related programs (BGF90). Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Montpellier, France, Communication no. 28-06.Google Scholar
Olde Riekerink, RGM, Barkema, HW, Kelton, DF, Scholl, DT 2008. Incidence rate of clinical mastitis on Canadian dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 1366–1377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osteras, O, Solbu, H, Refsdal, AO, Roalkvam, T, Filseth, O, Minsaas, A 2007. Results and evaluation of thirty years of health recordings in the Norwegian dairy cattle population. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 4483–4497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ouweltjes, W, Smolders, EAA, Elving, L, van Eldik, P, Shukken, YH 1996. Fertility disorders and subsequent fertility in dairy cattle. Livestock Production Science 46, 213–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pryce, JE, Nielsen, BL, Veerkamp, RF, Simm, G 1999. Genotype and feeding system effects and interactions for health and fertility traits in dairy cattle. Livestock Production Science 57, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simianer, H, Solbu, H, Schaeffer, LR 1991. Estimated genetic correlations between disease and yield traits in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 4358–4365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steine, G, Kristofersson, D, Guttormsen, AG 2008. Economic evaluation of the breeding goal for Norwegian Red dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 418–426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stengärde, LU, Pehrson, BG 2002. Effects of management, feeding, and treatment on clinical and biochemical variables in cattle with displaced abomasum. American Journal of Veterinary Research 63, 137–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomsen, PT, Munksgaard, L, Togersen, FA 2008. Evaluation of a lameness scoring system for dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 119–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uribe, HA, Kennedy, BW, Martin, SW, Kelton, DF 1995. Genetic parameters for common health disorders of Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 78, 421–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Dorp, TE, Dekkers, JCM, Martin, SW, Noordhuizen, JPTM 1998. Genetic parameters of health disorders, and relationships with 305-day milk yield and conformation traits of registered Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 2264–2270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwald, NR, Weigel, KA, Chang, YM, Welper, RD, Clay, JS 2004a. Genetic selection for health traits using producer-recorded data. I. Incidence rates, heritability estimates, and sire breeding values. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 4287–4294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwald, NR, Weigel, KA, Chang, YM, Welper, RD, Clay, JS 2004b. Genetic selection for health traits using producer-recorded data. II. Genetic correlations, disease probabilities and relationships with existing traits. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 4295–4302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed