Evaluation of updated Feed Saved breeding values developed in Australian Holstein dairy cattle
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Although selection for increased milk production traits has led to a genetic increase in body weight (BW), the genetic gain in milk production has exceeded the gain in BW, so gross feed efficiency has improved. Nonetheless, greater gains may be possible by directly selecting for a measure of feed efficiency. Australia first introduced Feed Saved (FS) estimated breeding value (EBV) in 2015. Feed Saved combines residual feed intake (RFI) genomic EBV and maintenance requirements calculated from mature BW EBV. The FS EBV was designed to enable the selection of cows for reduced energy requirements with similar milk production. In this study, we used a reference population of 3,711 animals in a multivariate analysis including Australian heifers (AUSh), Australian cows (AUSc), and overseas cows (OVEc) to update the Australian EBV for lifetime RFI (i.e., a breeding value that incorporated RFI in growing and lactating cows) and to recalculate the FS EBV in Australian Holstein bulls (AUSb). The estimates of genomic heritabilities using univariate (only AUSc or AUSh) to trivariate (including the OVEc) analyses were similar. Genomic heritabilities for RFI were estimated as 0.18 for AUSc, 0.27 for OVEc, and 0.36 for AUSh. The genomic correlation for RFI between AUSc and AUSh was 0.47 and that between AUSc and OVEc was 0.94, but these estimates were associated with large standard errors (range: 0.18-0.28). The reliability of lifetime RFI (a component of FS) in the trivariate analysis (i.e., including OVEc) increased from 11% to 20% compared with the 2015 model and was greater, by 12%, than in a bivariate analysis in which the reference population included only AUSc and AUSh. By applying the prediction equation of the 2020 model, the average reliability of the FS EBV in 20,816 AUSb that were born between 2010 and 2020 improved from 33% to 43%. Previous selection strategies-that is, using the predecessor of the Balanced Performance Index (Australian Profit Ranking index) that did not include FS-have resulted in an unfavorable genetic trend in FS. However, this unfavorable trend has stabilized since 2015, when FS was included in the Balanced Performance Index, and is expected to move in a favorable direction with selection on Balanced Performance Index or the Health Weighted Index. Doubling the reference population, particularly by incorporating international data for feed efficiency, has improved the reliability of the FS EBV. This could lead to increased genetic gain for feed efficiency in the Australian industry.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle