2016
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153423
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Use of Kosher Phenotyping for Mapping QTL Affecting Susceptibility to Bovine Respiratory Disease

Abstract: Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in feedlot cattle, caused by multiple pathogens that become more virulent in response to stress. As clinical signs often go undetected and various preventive strategies failed, identification of genes affecting BRD is essential for selection for resistance. Selective DNA pooling (SDP) was applied in a genome wide association study (GWAS) to map BRD QTLs in Israeli Holstein male calves. Kosher scoring of lung adhesions was used to … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
35
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
1
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An objective QTL selection logic is therefore paramount. In contrast to a study by Lipkin et al (2016) that considered P-values only, our QTL selection logic accounted for both Pvalues and the long-range LD (r 2 ) usually observed in dairy cattle. In our study, we report 11 MS QTL, of which 4 QTL are in limited pleiotropy with CM and SCS, suggesting that faster milking cows can be selected for, at least with QTL reported here, with only minimal risk of increases in SCS or CM.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…An objective QTL selection logic is therefore paramount. In contrast to a study by Lipkin et al (2016) that considered P-values only, our QTL selection logic accounted for both Pvalues and the long-range LD (r 2 ) usually observed in dairy cattle. In our study, we report 11 MS QTL, of which 4 QTL are in limited pleiotropy with CM and SCS, suggesting that faster milking cows can be selected for, at least with QTL reported here, with only minimal risk of increases in SCS or CM.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Neibergs et al [ 35 ] estimated heritability of BRD incidence to be 17% and 29% when using case-control or graduated scoring analyses, respectively, as opposed to binomial (yes or no) morbidity classification. Recent findings of QTL associated with BVD persistent infection [ 18 ] and BRD susceptibility or response [ 19 , 20 , 21 ] also provide evidence for continued genetic investigation regarding host-pathogen interactions. Increases in U.S. feedlot mortality from the early 1990s into the 2000s [ 36 , 37 ] attributed to BRD is perplexing given improved vaccination recommendations and implementation of beef quality assurance programs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Investigations regarding cattle breed and family influences on BRD incidence [ 8 , 9 , 16 , 17 ] have shown selection potential for improved health, but are very limited, particularly for specific BRD pathogens. Recent findings have identified genomic regions affecting BRD incidence or responses [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ], and improved understanding of complex host-pathogen relationships require detailed phenotypes and quantifiable causative components to advance potential cattle management strategies. The objective of this study was to investigate potential interactions of sire lines with BRD vaccine treatments on weight gain and feed intake following a standardized BVDV1b challenge under common U.S. cattle management and production conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, visual inspection of the chromosomal Manhattan plots by families showed distinct clusters of markers with high −LogP values intermixed with markers with low −LogP values ( Figure 1 ). Therefore, following Lipkin et al [ 41 ], we identified QTL by using a moving average of −LogP (mAvg) to smooth the Manhattan plots. We used a window size of ~0.1 Mb (27 markers) with a step size of 1 marker and a critical threshold mAvg of −LogP = 2.0 ( p = 0.01) to declare significance, and Log drop 1 [ 42 ] to define QTLR boundaries.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%