MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161821996 · doi:10.3168/jds.2020-19889

Breeding for reduced methane emission and feed-efficient Holstein cows: An international response

2021· article· en· W3161821996 on OpenAlexaffabout
C.I.V. Manzanilla-Pech, Peter Løvendahl, Daniel M. Gordo, Gareth F. Difford, J.E. Pryce, Flávio S. Schenkel, S. Wegmann, F. Miglior, T.C.S. Chud, Peter J. Moate, S.R.O. Williams, C.M. Richardson, Paul Stothard, Jan Lassen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidual feed intakeMethaneBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Genomic selectionLactationMethane emissionsAnimal scienceBiotechnologyDry matterProduction (economics)ResidualPopulationAgronomyEnvironmental scienceBody weightFeed conversion ratioEcologyMathematicsGeneticsGeneComputer scienceMedicineEnvironmental healthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selecting for lower methane (CH 4 ) emitting animals is one of the best approaches to reduce CH 4 given that genetic progress is permanent and cumulative over generations. As genetic selection requires a large number of animals with records and few countries actively record CH 4 , combining data from different countries could help to expedite accurate genetic parameters for CH 4 traits and build a future genomic reference population. Additionally, if we want to include CH 4 in the breeding goal, it is important to know the genetic correlations of CH 4 traits with other economically important traits. Therefore, the aim of this study was first to estimate genetic parameters of 7 suggested methane traits, as well as genetic correlations between methane traits and production, maintenance, and efficiency traits using a multicountry database. The second aim was to estimate genetic correlations within parities and stages of lactation for CH 4 . The third aim was to evaluate the expected response of economically important traits by including CH 4 traits in the breeding goal. A total of 15,320 methane production (MeP, g/d) records from 2,990 cows belonging to 4 countries (Canada, Australia, Switzerland, and Denmark) were analyzed. Records on dry matter intake (DMI), body weight (BW), body condition score, and milk yield (MY) were also available. Additional traits such as methane yield (MeY; g/kg DMI), methane intensity (MeI; g/kg energy-corrected milk), a genetic standardized methane production, and 3 definitions of residual methane production (g/d), residual feed intake, metabolic BW (MBW), BW change, and energy-corrected milk were calculated. The estimated heritability of MeP was 0.21, whereas heritability estimates for MeY and MeI were 0.30 and 0.38, and for the residual methane traits heritability ranged from 0.13 to 0.16. Genetic correlations between different methane traits were moderate to high (0.41 to 0.97). Genetic correlations between MeP and economically important traits ranged from 0.29 (MY) to 0.65 (BW and MBW), being 0.41 for DMI. Selection index calculations showed that residual methane had the most potential for inclusion in the breeding goal when compared with MeP, MeY, and MeI, as residual methane allows for selection of low methane emitting animals without compromising other economically important traits. Inclusion of residual feed intake in the breeding goal could further reduce methane, as the correlation with residual methane is moderate and elicits a favorable correlated response. Adding a negative economic value for methane could facilitate a substantial reduction in methane emissions while maintaining an increase in milk production.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations104
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207