Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-lvwk9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-18T15:00:00.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A terminal sire selection index for UK beef cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

P. R. Amer ,
R. Crump  and
G. Simm
P. R. Amer
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
R. Crump
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
G. Simm
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

A selection index which incorporates estimated breeding values of traits recorded in the United Kingdom pedigree beef cattle breeds is described. The breeding objective is made up of commercial carcass, calving difficulty and gestation length traits. Economic values for these breeding objective traits are summarized from related studies, while partial genetic regression estimates of breeding objective traits on recorded traits are derived mainly from the literature.

The selection index is described in terms of the reduction in expected genetic response from selection on the index when individual recorded traits are omitted and the expected genetic responses in breeding objective traits with selection on the index under the assumption of mass selection. Failure to record all calving traits (birth weight, calving difficulty and gestation length) resulted in a reduction in expected economic response to selection of 8% from the situation where both calving traits and production traits (400-day weight, ultrasonic fat and muscle depths, and muscling score) are recorded. With a few stated exceptions, the index is relatively robust to errors in estimates of individual parameters.

It is suggested that the total index be used to assist commercial bull and semen buyers in their selection decisions but that two sub-indices for calving and production traits also be published to allow buyers to adjust emphasis on the two groups of traits depending on their individual production circumstances.

Keywords

beef cattleselection indexterminal sire
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 3 , December 1998 , pp. 445 - 454
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Allen, D. M. 1988. Bull breed effects on calving difficulties i n dairy and suckler herds. British Cattle Breeders Club 43: 77–83.Google Scholar
Allen, D. M. and Steane, D. E. 1985. Beef selection indices. British Cattle Breeders Club Digest 40: 63–70.Google Scholar
Amer, P. and Emmans, G. C. 1998. Predicting changes in food energy requirements due to genetic changes in growth and body composition of growing ruminants. Animal Science. 66: 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amer, P. R., Lowman, B. G. and Simm, G. 1996. Economic values for reproduction traits in beef suckler herds based on a calving distribution model. Livestock Production Science 46: 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amer, P. R., Emmans, G. C. and Simm, G. 1997. Economic values for carcase traits in UK commercial beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 51: 267–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barwick, S. A., Henzell, A. L. and Graser, H.-U. 1994. Developments in the construction and use of selection indexes for genetic evaluation of beef cattle in Australia. Proceedings of the fifth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Guelph, vol. 15, pp. 521–530.Google Scholar
Bourdon, R. M. and Brinks, J. S. 1982. Genetic, environmental and phenotypic relationships among gestation length, birth weight, growth traits and age at first calving in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science. 55: 543–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burfening, P. J., Kress, D. D., Friedrich, R. L. and Vaniman, D. D. 1978. Phenotypic and genetic relationships between calving ease, gestation length, birthweight and preweaning growth. Journal of Animal Science. 47: 595–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crump, R. 1997. BLUP for British beef cattle. RI/SAC report.Google Scholar
Crump, R., Simm, G., Nicholson, D., Findlay, R. H., Bryan, J. G. E. and Thompson, R. 1994. Genetic evaluation of British pedigree beef cattle breeds. Proceedings of the fifth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Guelph, vol. 17, pp. 180–183.Google Scholar
Cunningham, E. P. 1969. The relative efficiencies of selection indexes. Acta Agriculturx Scandinavica. 19: 45–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duarte, W. J., Leboute, E. M., Martins, E. S. and Ribeiro, J. A. R. 1985. [Estimates of environmental effects and genetic parameters for gestation length, calf birth weight and incidence of dystocia in a Charolais herd.] Animal Breeding Abstracts 54: 360 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Gregory, K. E., Cundiff, L. V. and Koch, R. M. 1995. Genetic and phenotypic (co)variances for growth and carcase traits and composite populations of beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 73: 1920–1926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazel, L. N. 1943. The genetic basis for constructing selection indexes. Genetics, USA. 28: 476–490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henderson, C. R. 1977. Best linear unbiased prediction of breeding values not in the model for records. Journal of Dairy Science. 60: 783–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, J. W. 1981. Index selection for simultaneous improvement of several characters. Proceedings of the international congress on genetics (ed. Belayer, D. K.), vol. 1, book 2, pp. 221–229. MIR Moscow, USSR.Google Scholar
Journaux, L. and Renand, G. 1992. Genetic relationship between station performance testing and station progeny testing of Charolais bulls. Forty-third annual meeting of European Association for Animal Production, Madrid, Spain, 17 September 1992.Google Scholar
Kemp, R. A., Wilton, J. W. and Schaeffer, L. R. 1988. Phenotypic and genetic parameter estimates for gestation length, calving ease and birth weight in Simmental cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68: 291–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cook, G. L. and Grantley-Smith, M. 1986. National estimates of the body composition of British cattle, sheep and pigs with special References to trends in fatness. A review. Meat Science. 17: 107–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roots, K. R., Gibson, J. P. and Wilton, J. W. 1994. Analyses of published genetic parameter estimates for beef production traits. 2. Phenotypic and genetic correlations. Animal Breeding Abstracts 62: 825–853.Google Scholar
Lamb, M. A., Robison, O. W. and Tess, M. W. 1990. Genetic parameters for carcase traits in Hereford bulls. Journal of Animal Science 68: 64–69.Google Scholar
Meijering, A. 1980. Beef crossing with Dutch Friesian cows: model calculations on expected levels of calving difficulties and their consequences for profitability. Livestock Production Science. 7: 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohiuddin, G. 1993. Estimates of genetic and phenotypic parameters of some performance traits in beef cattle. Animal Breeding Abstracts. 61: 495–522.Google Scholar
Mohiuddin, G. 1995. Estimation of genetic parameters for beef cattle in UK herds. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Morris, C. A. 1980. A review of relationships between aspects of reproduction in beef heifers and their lifetime production. 2. Associations with relative calving date and with dystocia. Animal Breeding Abstracts. 48: 753–767.Google Scholar
Rehben, E. 1992. Morphology evaluation for beef recording in France. Forty-third annual meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Madrid, Spain, 13–17 September 1992.Google Scholar
Renand, G. 1985. Genetic parameters of French beef breeds used in crossbreeding for young bull production. II. Slaughter performance. Genetique, Selection, Evolution 17: 265–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneeberger, M., Barwick, S. A., Crow, G. H. and Hammond, K. 1992. Economic indices using breeding values predicted by BLUP. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 109: 180–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. 1983. Effects of changes in economic weights on the efficiency of index selection. Journal of Animal Science. 56: 1057–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visscher, P. and Amer, P. R. 1996. Customised selection indices. Proceedings of the international workshop on improvement offunctional traits in cattle. Interbull bulletin no 12, Gembloux, Belgium, 21–23 January 1996.Google Scholar
Wilton, J. W. 1986. Impact of industry structure, intensity of production and resource constraints on research breeding objectives. Proceedings of the third world congress on applied to livestock production, Lincoln, vol. 9, pp. 220–231.Google Scholar