MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2596472052 · doi:10.3168/jds.2016-12243

Heritabilities of measured and mid-infrared predicted milk fat globule size, milk fat and protein percentages, and their genetic correlations

2017· article· en· W2596472052 on OpenAlexafffundabout
A. Fleming, Flávio S. Schenkel, A. Koeck, F. Malchiodi, Milena Corredig, Bonnie A. Mallard, Mahdi Sargolzaei, F. Miglior

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Dairy CommissionDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsHeritabilityGenetic correlationAnimal scienceRepeatabilityLactationCorrelationBiologyGenetic variationMathematicsStatisticsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to estimate the heritability of milk fat globule (MFG) size and mid-infrared (MIR) predicted MFG size in Holstein cattle. The genetic correlations between measured and predicted MFG size with milk fat and protein percentage were also investigated. Average MFG size was measured in 1,583 milk samples taken from 254 Holstein cows from 29 herds across Canada. Size was expressed as volume moment mean (D[4,3]) and surface moment mean (D[3,2]). Analyzed milk samples also had average MFG size predicted from their MIR spectral records. Fat and protein percentages were obtained for all test-day milk samples in the cow's lactation. Univariate and bivariate repeatability animal models were used to estimate heritability and genetic correlations. Moderate heritabilities of 0.364 and 0.466 were found for D[4,3] and D[3,2], respectively, and a strong genetic correlation was found between the 2 traits (0.98). The heritabilities for the MIR-predicted MFG size were lower than those estimated for the measured MFG size at 0.300 for predicted D[4,3] and 0.239 for predicted D[3,2]. The genetic correlation between measured and predicted D[4,3] was 0.685; the correlation was slightly higher between measured and predicted D[3,2] at 0.764, likely due to the better prediction accuracy of D[3,2]. Milk fat percentage had moderate genetic correlations with both D[4,3] and D[3,2] (0.538 and 0.681, respectively). The genetic correlation between predicted MFG size and fat percentage was much stronger (greater than 0.97 for both predicted D[4,3] and D[3,2]). The stronger correlation suggests a limitation for the use of the predicted values of MFG size as indicator traits for true average MFG size in milk in selection programs. Larger samples sizes are required to provide better evidence of the estimated genetic parameters. A genetic component appears to exist for the average MFG size in bovine milk, and the variation could be exploited in selection programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→