Effect of genomic selection on rate of inbreeding and coancestry and effective population size of Holstein and Jersey cattle populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic diversity in livestock populations is a significant contributor to the sustainability of animal production. Also, genetic diversity allows animal production to become more responsive to environmental changes and market demands. The loss of genetic diversity can result in a plateau in production and may also result in loss of fitness or viability in animal production. In this study, we investigated the rate of inbreeding (Δ F ), rate of coancestry (Δ f ), and effective population size ( N e ) as important quantitative indicators of genetic diversity and evaluated the effect of the recent implementation of genomic selection on the loss of genetic diversity in North American Holstein and Jersey dairy cattle. To estimate the rate of inbreeding and coancestry, inbreeding and coancestry coefficients were calculated using the traditional pedigree method and genomic methods estimated from segment- and marker-based approaches. Furthermore, we estimated N e from the rate of inbreeding and coancestry and extent of linkage disequilibrium. A total of 205,755 and 89,238 pedigreed and genotyped animals born between 1990 and 2018 inclusively were available for Holsteins and Jerseys, respectively. The estimated average pedigree inbreeding coefficients were 7.74 and 7.20% for Holsteins and Jerseys, respectively. The corresponding values for the segment and marker-by-marker genomic inbreeding coefficients were 13.61, 15.64, and 31.40% for Holsteins and 21.16, 22.54, and 42.62% for Jerseys, respectively. The average coancestry coefficients were 8.33 and 15.84% for Holsteins and 9.23 and 23.46% for Jerseys with pedigree and genomic measures, respectively. Generation interval for the whole 29-yr time period averaged approximately 5 yr for all selection pathways combined. The Δ F per generation based on pedigree, segment, and marker-by-marker genomic measures for the entire 29-yr period was estimated to be 0.75, 1.10, 1.16, and 1.02% for Holstein animals and 0.67, 0.62, 0.63, and 0.59% for Jersey animals, respectively. The Δ f was estimated to be 0.98 and 0.98% for Holsteins and 0.73 and 0.78% for Jerseys with pedigree and genomic measures, respectively. These Δ F and Δ f translated to an N e that ranged from 43 to 66 animals for Holsteins and 64 to 85 animals for Jerseys. In addition, the N e based on linkage disequilibrium was 58 and 120 for Holsteins and Jerseys, respectively. The 10-yr period that involved the application of genomic selection resulted in an increased Δ F per generation with ranges from 1.19 to 2.06% for pedigree and genomic measures in Holsteins. Given the rate at which inbreeding is increasing after the implementation of genomic selection, there is a need to implement measures and means for controlling the rate of inbreeding per year, which will help to manage and maintain farm animal genetic resources.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".