Direct and maternal additive and heterosis effects from crossing Bos indicus and Bos taurus cattle: cow and calf performance in two environments

Arthur, P. F.; Hearnshaw, H; Stephenson, PD

doi:10.1016/s0301-6226(98)00172-9

Cited by 37 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Schoeman et al (1993) obtained a larger and significant heterosis component for the H x A (5.3%) cross, while in the H x S (1.6%) and S x A (0.05%) crosses it was non-significant. In beef cattle direct heterosis effects generally range from 1 to 11% for BW, with values for Bos indicus x Bos taurus at the upper end of the scale (Long, 1980;Cundiff et al, 1986;Arthur et al, 1999). The percentage heterosis obtained in this study is thus within the range of reported literature values.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Therefore, crossbred cows in this study did not provide a stronger in utero environment effect to increase the probability of dystocia as it is affected by calf birth weight. Studies of McDonald & Turner (1972), Dillard et al (1980), Sacco et al (1989), Van Zyl (1990 and Arthur et al (1994Arthur et al ( ,1999 are in general agreement with the existence of nonsignificant maternal heterotic effects for BW. In most investigations (Cundiff et al, 1974;Roberson et al, 1986;Dearborn et al, 1987;Elzo et al, 1990;Schoeman et al, 1993) significant maternal heterotic effects for BW have been reported.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 62%

“…The heterotic effects obtained by Schoeman et al (1993) were also significant (P ≤ 0.01) for all three breed combinations, and were 11.0% for H x S, 10.1% for H x A, and only 3.1% for S x A. In beef cattle, direct heterosis effects generally range from 3 to 16% for WW, with values for Bos indicus x Bos taurus at the upper end of the scale (Long, 1980;Cundiff et al, 1986;Arthur et al, 1999). The percentage heterosis obtained in this study is thus within the range of reported literature values.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This effect is probably the result of increased environmental advantage of the progeny from crossbred dams because of the increased milk production and prenatal environment provided by the crossbred cow (McDonald & Turner, 1972;Sheridan 1980;Schoeman et al, 1993). In most studies these estimates are positive which indicates that calves of crossbred dams have a better maternal environment to express their growth potential (Arthur et al, 1999).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Estimates of crossbreeding parameters in a multibreed beef cattle crossbreeding project

Skrypzeck¹,

Schoeman²,

Jordaan³

et al. 2000

SA J. An. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data from purebred and crossbred cattle, consisting of the Afrikaner (A), Simmentaler (S) and Hereford (H) breeds managed in a relatively intensive but high stocking rate environment, were analysed to estimate breed direct effects, individual heterotic effects, breed maternal and maternal heterotic effects for birth weight (BW) and weaning weight (WW). Simmentaler breed direct effects, expressed as deviation from the general mean, were positive (P ≤ 0.01) for both traits. Hereford and Afrikaner breed direct effects were negative (P ≤ 0.01) for both traits while the Afrikaner breed direct effects exceeded those of the Hereford. Afrikaner direct maternal effects were positive (P ≤ 0.01) for both traits. The Hereford direct maternal effect was negative (P ≤ 0.05) (-2.9%) for WW. Simmentaler maternal effect was negative (P ≤ 0.01 ) for BW but non-significant (P ≥ 0.05) for WW. Individual heterotic effects for BW were significant (P ≤ 0.01) in H x S (3.5%) and S x A (11.0%) only. Individual heterotic effects were positive (P ≤ 0.01) for WW, with that of the H x A (9.8%) and S x A (6.7%) crosses exceeding the S x H (3.1%) cross. Maternal heterotic effects were non-significant (P ≥ 0.05) for both BW and WW .

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 62%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Estimates of crossbreeding parameters in a multibreed beef cattle crossbreeding project

Skrypzeck¹,

Schoeman²,

Jordaan³

et al. 2000

SA J. An. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Optimal design of a multi-breed population for use in diverse environments is likely to be characterized by differences in breed proportions varying with environmental conditions (Long, 1980;Arthur et al, 1999). Optimal proportions of Bos indicus (for adaptation) and Bos taurus (for production) breeds may vary with differences in both management and climate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple-breed reaction norm animal model accounting for robustness and heteroskedastic in a Nelore–Angus crossed population

Oliveira¹,

Júnior²,

Cardoso³

2016

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our objective was to genetically characterize post-weaning weight gain (PWG), over a 345-day period after weaning, of Brangus-Ibagé (Nelore × Angus) cattle. Records (n = 4016) were from the foundation herd of the Embrapa South Livestock Center. A Bayesian approach was used to assess genotype by environment (G × E) interaction and to identify a suitable model for the estimation of genetic parameters and use in genetic evaluation. A robust and heteroscedastic reaction norm multiple-breed animal model was proposed. The model accounted for heterogeneity of residual variance associated with effects of breed, heterozygosity, sex and contemporary group; and was robust with respect to outliers. Additive genetic effects were modeled for the intercept and slope of a reaction norm to changes in the environmental gradient. Inference was based on Monte Carlo Markov Chain of 110 000 cycles, after 10 000 cycles of burn-in. Bayesian model choice criteria indicated the proposed model was superior to simpler sub-models that did not account for G × E interaction, multiple-breed structure, robustness and heteroscedasticity. We conclude that, for the Brangus-Ibagé population, these factors should be jointly accounted for in genetic evaluation of PWG. Heritability estimates increased proportionally with improvement in the environmental conditions gradient. Therefore, an increased proportion of differences in performance among animals were explained by genetic factors rather than environmental factors as rearing conditions improved. As a consequence response to selection may be increased in favorable environments.

show abstract

References

2004

Livestock Biodiversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Direct and maternal additive and heterosis effects from crossing Bos indicus and Bos taurus cattle: cow and calf performance in two environments

Cited by 37 publications

References 15 publications

Estimates of crossbreeding parameters in a multibreed beef cattle crossbreeding project

Estimates of crossbreeding parameters in a multibreed beef cattle crossbreeding project

Multiple-breed reaction norm animal model accounting for robustness and heteroskedastic in a Nelore–Angus crossed population

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About