The study on estimated breeding value and accuracy for economic
                    traits in Gyoungnam Hanwoo cow (Korean cattle)

Kim, Eun Ho; Kim, Hyeon Kwon; Sun, Du Won; Kang, Ho Chan; Lee, Doo-Ho; Lee, Seung Hwan; Lee, Jae Bong; Lim, Hyun‐Tae

doi:10.5187/jast.2020.62.4.429

Cited by 4 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the genetic correlation of EMA and BFT using PBLUP and GBLUP each being -0.02 ± 0.07 and −0.06 ± 0.03, the established correlation is negative while this is positive for all other traits. Looking at previous research, the genetic and phenotypic correlation in PBLUP value reported by Kim et al (2020) and the results of this study are the same, because they use the same reference group. According to the research by Kim et al (2010), the genetic correlation of EMA, BFT and MS concerning CWT was 0.61, 0.19 and 0.08, of BFT and MS with BFT as -0.22 and 0.17 and of BFT and MS as 0.05, which were similar to this study.…”

Section: Basic Statistics Analysis Of Reference Groupsupporting

confidence: 64%

“…Looking at previous research that estimated genetic trend using pedigree, the heritability of carcass trait reported by Kim et al (2020) and the results of this study are the same, because they use the same reference group. 2013) reported the heritability of EMA, BFT and MS as 0.46, 0.60 and 0.63 for progeny test cattle, which was higher than the results of this study.…”

Section: Basic Statistics Analysis Of Reference Groupmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…The analysis model used in this study was PBLUP that estimated EBV using pedigree and GBLUP that estimated GEBV using genotype, with each model using the pedigree and genotype of test and reference groups to estimate the relationship coefficient between individuals and estimate (G)EBV along with phenotype. To use the two analysis methods, a reference group is required, with two reference groups used: Reference Group 1 consisted of 545,483 heads containing pedigree and phenotype and was the same reference group used by Kim et al (2020). Reference group 2 consisted of 17,226 heads with genotype and phenotype.…”

Section: Analysed Group and Phenotypic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While this is a similar result compared to the reference group used in the study, in the case of the progeny test cattle used for the Hanwoo evaluation system reported by Park et al (2019), the four traits were 371.63 ± 42.07 kg, 371.63 ± 42.07 cm 2 , 9.71 ± 3.82 mm and 3.58 ± 1.62 points, respectively, which were lower than the results of this study. This is thought to be the difference in growth traits such as MS which hit the highest point around 29 ~ 31 months, and the progeny test cattle are slaughtered at 24 months on average, while regular Hanwoo is slaughtered at 30 months on average (Kim et al, 2020). In order to increase the efficiency of the time used for progeny testing, general Hanwoo farms are slaughtering cows at 30 months, which is different from progeny test which slaughter at 24 months.…”

Section: Basic Statistics Analysis Of Reference Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to its mild nature, adaptability to temperature and excellent productivity, improvements have been made since the 1960s under the leadership of the nation and institutions. Since then, improvements have been made with the goal of increasing the average carcass traits, and genetic improvement is being achieved by selecting elite calves (Kim et al., 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Estimation of breeding value and accuracy using pedigree and genotype of Hanwoo cows (Korean cattle)

Kim

Kang

Sun

et al. 2021

J Animal Breeding Genetics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The genetic improvement of Hanwoo is dependent on the estimated breeding value (EBV) of pedigree‐based Korean proven bull's number, and the genetic evaluation for cows is difficult due to insufficient pedigree and test records. Genomic selection involves utilizing the individual's genotype to estimate the breeding value (BV) and is determined to be an appropriate evaluation method for cows who lack test information. This study used pedigree and genotype to estimate and analyse BV and accuracy of Hanwoo cows in the Gyeongnam area using pedigree best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP) and genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP). The test group acquired pedigree and genotype of 919 Hanwoo cows in the Gyeongnam area. The traits used for analysis were carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle areas (EMA), backfat thickness (BFT) and marbling score (MS). PBLUP used Reference group 1 containing the pedigree and phenotype of 919 Hanwoo cows and 545,483 heads to construct the numeric relationship matrix and estimated the EBV and accuracy. GBLUP used Reference group 2 containing the genotype and phenotype of 919 Hanwoo cows and 17,226 heads to construct the genomic relationship matrix and estimated the genomic EBV (GEBV) and accuracy. In the order of CWT, EMA, BFT and MS, the accuracy of PBLUP was 0.488, 0.480, 0.482 and 0.486 while the accuracy of GBLUP was higher with 0.779, 0.758, 0.766 and 0.791. And for 104 cows without relationship coefficient on pedigree to the reference group, the accuracy as PBLUP was estimated to be 0, but for GBLUP, it was possible to estimate the accuracy for all individuals. If GBLUP is applied to cows raised in general farms, the genetic evaluation can be performed even on animals without pedigree and high‐accuracy estimation, enabling selection of excellent cows. Accordingly, by securing the genetic diversity of cows, it is expected to increase the profitability of farms by decreasing the inbreeding rate and increasing efficiency of elite calf production.

show abstract

Section: Basic Statistics Analysis Of Reference Groupsupporting

confidence: 64%

Section: Basic Statistics Analysis Of Reference Groupmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Analysed Group and Phenotypic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Basic Statistics Analysis Of Reference Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Estimation of breeding value and accuracy using pedigree and genotype of Hanwoo cows (Korean cattle)

Kim

Kang

Sun

et al. 2021

J Animal Breeding Genetics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of various models for the estimation of heritability and breeding values

Hamadani

Ganai

Khan

et al. 2023

Trop Anim Health Prod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The exploration of additive genetic variance for the selection of animals is the central paradigm in quantitative genetics and it is important to use appropriate animal models considering important factors. This study compares various factor effects for heritability and breeding values estimations on data collected on the Corriedale. Overall, the heritability estimates were highest for birthweight. Both the additive genetic variance and the heritability got reduced upon adding more random effects. Year-effect as random reduced the heritability except for birthweight. The highest average accuracy for breeding values for birth, weaning, 6, 9, and 12-monthweights for were 0.656, 0.567, 0.519, 0.486, and 0.515. These were observed for models having sex or sex and parity as xed effects. It is concluded that xed and random factors have a signi cant effect on genetic-factors and breeding-value accuracies and should be considered during selection programs. Such farm-speci c models shall make the selection program more effective.

show abstract

Assessment of genomic breeding values and their accuracies for carcass traits in Jeju Black cattle using whole‐genome SNP chip panels

Haque

Iqbal

Bae

et al. 2023

J Animal Breeding Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the breeding value and accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) of carcass traits in Jeju Black cattle (JBC) using Hanwoo steers and JBC as a reference population using the single‐trait animal model. Our research included genotype and phenotype information on 19,154 Hanwoo steers with 1097 JBC acting as the reference population. Likewise, the test population consisted of 418 genotyped JBC individuals with no phenotypic records for those carcass traits. For estimating the accuracy of GEBV, we divided the entire population into three groups. Hanwoo and JBC make up the first group; Hanwoo and JBC, who has both the genotype and phenotypic records, are referred to as the reference (training) population, and JBC, who lacks phenotypic information is referred to as the test (validation) population. The second group consists of the JBC (without phenotype) as the test population and Hanwoo as a reference population with phenotype and genotypic data. The only JBCs in the third group are those who have genotypic and phenotypic data on them as a reference population but no phenotypic data on them as a test population. The single‐trait animal model was used in all three groups for statistical purposes. The reference populations estimated heritabilities for carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), backfat thickness (BF), and marbling score (MS) as 0.30, 0.26, 0.26, and 0.34 for the Hanwoo steer and 0.42, 0.27, 0.26, and 0.48 for JBC. The average accuracy for carcass traits in Group 1 was 0.80 for the Hanwoo and JBC reference population compared with 0.73 for the JBC test population. Although the average accuracy for carcass traits in Group 2 was 0.80, it was 0.80 for the Hanwoo reference population and only 0.56 for the JBC test population. The average accuracy for the JBC reference and test populations was 0.68 and 0.50, respectively, when they were included in the accuracy comparison without the Hanwoo reference population. Groups 1 and 2 used Hanwoo as reference population, which led to a better average accuracy; however, Group 3 only used the JBC reference and test population, which led to a lower average accuracy. This might be due to the fact that Group 3 used a smaller reference size than the group that came before it and that the genetic makeup of the Hanwoo and JBC breeds differed. The GEBV accuracy for MS was higher than that of other traits across all three analysis groups, followed by CWT, EMA, and BF, which may be partially explained by the MS traits' higher heritability. This study suggests that in order to achieve more accuracy, a large reference population particular to a breed should be established. Therefore, to increase the accuracy of GEBV prediction and the genetic benefit from genomic selection in JBC, individual reference breeds, and large populations are required.

show abstract

The study on estimated breeding value and accuracy for economic traits in Gyoungnam Hanwoo cow (Korean cattle)

Cited by 4 publications

References 20 publications

Estimation of breeding value and accuracy using pedigree and genotype of Hanwoo cows (Korean cattle)

Estimation of breeding value and accuracy using pedigree and genotype of Hanwoo cows (Korean cattle)

Comparison of various models for the estimation of heritability and breeding values

Assessment of genomic breeding values and their accuracies for carcass traits in Jeju Black cattle using whole‐genome SNP chip panels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About