MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3110978852 · doi:10.3390/ani10122410

Using Random Regression Models to Genetically Evaluate Functional Longevity Traits in North American Angus Cattle

2020· article· en· W3110978852 on OpenAlexafffund
Hinayah Rojas de Oliveira, Luiz F. Brito, Stephen P. Miller, Flávio S. Schenkel

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMitacs
KeywordsCullingLongevityHeritabilityHerdGenetic correlationBiologyStatisticsDemographyIce calvingRandom effects modelAnimal scienceGenetic variationMathematicsEvolutionary biologyGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to propose novel longevity indicators by comparing genetic parameters for traditional (TL; i.e., the cow's lifespan after the first calving) and functional (FL; i.e., how long the cow stayed in the herd while also calving; assuming no missing (FLa) or missing (FLb) records for unknown calving) longevity, considering different culling reasons (natural death, structural problems, disease, fertility, performance, and miscellaneous). Longevity definitions were evaluated from 2 to 15 years of age, using single- and multiple-trait Bayesian random regression models (RRM). The RRM fitting heterogenous residual variance and fourth order Legendre polynomials were considered as the optimal models for the majority of longevity indicators. The average heritability estimates over ages for FLb (from 0.08 to 0.25) were always higher than those for FLa (from 0.07 to 0.19), and higher or equal to the ones estimated for TL (from 0.07 to 0.23), considering the different culling reasons. The average genetic correlations estimated between ages were low to moderate (~0.40), for all longevity definitions and culling reasons. However, removing the extreme ages (i.e., 2 and >12 years) increased the average correlation between ages (from ~0.40 to >0.70). The genetic correlations estimated between culling reasons were low (0.12 and 0.20 on average, considering all ages and ages between 3 and 12 years old, respectively), indicating that longevity based on different culling reasons should be considered as different traits in the genetic evaluations. Higher average genetic correlations (estimated from 3 to 12 years old) were observed between TL and FLb (0.73) in comparison to TL and FLa (0.64), or FLa and FLb (0.65). Consequently, a higher average proportion of commonly-selected sires, for the top 1% sires, was also observed between TL and FLb (91.74%), compared to TL and FLa (59.68%), or FLa and FLb (61.01%). Higher prediction accuracies for the expected daughter performances (calculated based on the pedigree information) were obtained for FLb in comparison to TL and FLa. Our findings indicate that FLb is preferred for the genetic evaluation of longevity. In addition, it is recommended including multiple longevity traits based on different groups of culling reasons in a selection sub-index, as they are genetically-different traits. Genetic selection based on breeding values at the age of four years is expected to result in greater selection responses for increased longevity in North American Angus cattle.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimals→Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock→French-language works237,207→