Potential Improvements in Rate of Genetic Gain from Marker-Assisted Selection in Dairy Cattle Breeding Schemes

93Citations
Citations of this article
54Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The value of marker-assisted selection in dairy cattle breeding schemes is predicted by a deterministic model. In these schemes, associations between markers and milk production were assessed from production records of daughters of a grandsire by a multiple regression model with random marker effects. By tracing markers from the grandsire to grandoffspring, deviations of grandoffspring from their full-sib family mean were predicted. Predictions of the within-family variance of the grandoffspring accounted for by markers amounted to up to 13.3%. This figure decreased when the number of daughters of the grandsire analyzed decreased and, less markedly, when the distance between flanking markers increased. Prediction of within-family deviations hardly improved rates of genetic gain in conventional progeny testing schemes; equal numbers of young bulls were born annually. Genetic gain and improvement of genetic gain because of prediction of within-family deviations were much higher in nucleus schemes. In these schemes, with short optimized generation intervals, conventional selection was mainly for pedigree information and did not use the within-family variance. Analysis of highly polymorphic markers in daughters of both grandsires accounted for 4.1 to 13.3% of the within-family variance, which increased rates of gain by 9.5 to 25.8% and 7.7 to 22.4% in open and closed nucleus schemes, respectively. Risk of breeding schemes, measured by the variance of the selection response, was not increased by the use of markers. © 1992, American Dairy Science Association. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Meuwissen, T. H. E., & Van Arendonk, J. A. M. (1992). Potential Improvements in Rate of Genetic Gain from Marker-Assisted Selection in Dairy Cattle Breeding Schemes. Journal of Dairy Science, 75(6), 1651–1659. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)77922-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free