Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T02:56:55.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Random regression models for genetic evaluation of clinical mastitis in dairy cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2009

E. Carlén ,
K. Grandinson ,
U. Emanuelson  and
E. Strandberg
E. Carlén*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
K. Grandinson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
U. Emanuelson
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
E. Strandberg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

A genetic analysis of longitudinal binary clinical mastitis (CM) data recorded on about 90 000 first-lactation Swedish Holstein cows was carried out using linear random regression models (RRM). This method for genetic evaluation of CM has theoretical advantages compared to the method of linear cross-sectional models (CSM), which is currently being used. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and suitability of estimating genetic parameters and predicting breeding values for CM with a linear sire RRM. For validation purposes, the estimates and predictions from the RRM were compared to those from linear sire longitudinal multivariate models (LMVM) and CSM. For each cow, the period from 10 days before to 241 days after calving was divided into four 1-week intervals followed by eight 4-week intervals. Within each interval, presence or absence of CM was scored as ‘1’ or ‘0’. The linear RRM used to explain the trajectory of CM over time included a set of explanatory variables plus a third-order Legendre polynomial function of time for the sire effect. The time-dependent heritabilities and genetic correlations from the chosen RRM corresponded fairly well with estimates obtained from the linear LMVM for the separate intervals. Some discrepancy between the two methods was observed, with the more unstable results being obtained from the linear LMVM. Both methods indicated clearly that CM was not genetically the same trait throughout lactation. The correlations between predicted sire breeding values from the RRM, summarized over different time periods, and from linear CSM were rather high. They were, however, less than unity (0.74 to 0.96), which indicated some re-ranking of sires. Sire curves based on the time-specific breeding values from the RRM illustrated differences in intercept and slope among the best and the worst sires. To conclude, a linear sire RRM seemed to work well for genetic evaluation purposes, but was sensitive for estimation of genetic parameters.

Keywords

dairy cattlegenetic evaluationclinical mastitisrandom regression model
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 8 , August 2009 , pp. 1100 - 1108
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

Averill, T, Rekaya, R, Weigel, K 2006. Random regression models for male and female fertility evaluation using longitudinal binary data. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 3681–3689.Google Scholar
Carlén, E, del Schneider, MP, Strandberg, E 2005. Comparison between linear models and survival analysis for genetic evaluation of clinical mastitis in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 797–803.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlén, E, Emanuelson, U, Strandberg, E 2006. Genetic evaluation of mastitis in dairy cattle using linear models, threshold models, and survival analysis: a simulation study. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 4049–4057.Google Scholar
Carlén, E, Strandberg, E, Roth, A 2004. Genetic parameters for clinical mastitis, somatic cell score, and production in the first three lactations of Swedish Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 3062–3070.Google Scholar
Chang, YM 2002. Multivariate and longitudinal models for binary data with applications to clinical mastitis in Norwegian cattle. PhD, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Chang, YM, Gianola, D, Heringstad, B, Klemetsdal, G 2004a. Effects of trait definition on genetic parameter estimates and sire evaluation for clinical mastitis with threshold models. Animal Science 79, 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, YM, Gianola, D, Heringstad, B, Klemetsdal, G 2004b. Longitudinal analysis of clinical mastitis at different stages of lactation in Norwegian cattle. Livestock Production Science 88, 251–261.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 2004. Multivariate threshold model analysis of clinical mastitis in multiparous Norwegian dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 3038–3046.Google Scholar
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
Hinrichs, D, Stamer, E, Junge, W, Kalm, E 2005. Genetic analyses of mastitis data using animal threshold models and genetic correlation with production traits. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 2260–2268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan, JS, Smith, KL, Hoblet, KH, Schoenberger, PS, Todhunter, DS, Hueston, WD, Pritchard, DE, Bowman, GL, Heider, LE, Brockett, BL, Conrad, HR 1989. Field survey of clinical mastitis in low somatic cell count herds. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 1547–1556.Google Scholar
Interbull 2008. Description of National Genetic Evaluation Systems for dairy cattle traits as applied in different Interbull member countries. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www-interbull.slu.se/national_ges_info2/framesida-ges.htmGoogle Scholar
International Dairy Federation 1997. Recommendations for presentation of mastitis-related data. Bulletin of the IDF 321, 6–25.Google Scholar
Jensen, J 2001. Genetic evaluation of dairy cattle using test-day models. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 2803–2812.Google Scholar
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
Lund, MS, Jensen, J, Petersen, PH 1999. Estimation of genetic and phenotypic parameters for clinical mastitis, somatic cell production deviance, and protein yield in dairy cattle using Gibbs sampling. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 1045–1051.Google Scholar
Madsen, P, Jensen, J 2008. An user’s guide to DMU. A package for analysing multivariate mixed models. Version 6, release 4.7. University of Aarhus, Tjele, Denmark.Google Scholar
Negussie, E, Strandén, I, Mäntysaari, EA 2008. Genetic associations of clinical mastitis with test-day somatic cell count and milk yield during first lactation of Finnish Ayrshire. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 1189–1197.Google Scholar
Negussie, E, Strandén, I, Mäntysaari, EA, Tsuruta, S 2006. Genetic parameters for clinical mastitis in Finnish Ayrshire: a longitudinal threshold model analysis. Proc. 8th WCGALP, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. CD-ROM Commun. No. 24-11.Google Scholar
Rauw, WM, Kanis, E, Noordhuizen-Stassen, EN, Grommers, FJ 1998. Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: a review. Livestock Production Science 56, 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rekaya, R, Gianola, D, Weigel, K, Shook, G 2003. Longitudinal random effects models for genetic analysis of binary data with application to mastitis in dairy cattle. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 35, 457–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saebø, S, Frigessi, A 2004. A genetic and spatial Bayesian analysis of mastitis resistance. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 36, 527–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS 2002. SAS Release 9.1, 2002–2003. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, LR 2004. Application of random regression models in animal breeding. Livestock Production Science 86, 35–45.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, RF, Brotherstone, S, Engel, B, Meuwissen, THE 2001. Analysis of censored survival data using random regression models. Animal Science 72, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwald, NR, Weigel, KA, Chang, YM, Welper, RD, Clay, JS 2006. Genetic analysis of clinical mastitis data from on-farm management software using threshold models. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 330–336.Google Scholar