An updated version of lifetime net merit incorporating additional fertility traits and new economic values

  • Published on
    23-Aug-2014

  • View
    171

  • Download
    18

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Presentation on proposed Net Merit 2014 made at the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding's Open Industry Meeting in Maryland on August 5, 2014.

Transcript

<p>Genomic Prediction Results</p> <div><p>An updated version of lifetime net merit incorporating additional fertility traits and new economic values</p></div> <p>John B. Cole* and Paul M. VanRaden</p> <p>Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory</p> <p>Agricultural Research Service, USDA</p> <p>Beltsville, MD 20705-2350</p> <p>john.cole@ars.usda.gov</p> <p>2014</p> <div><p>1</p></div> <div><p>Introduction</p><p>Lifetime net merit (NM$) is a selection index for commercial dairy producers</p><p>Cheese-, fluid, and grazing-merit indices accommodate alternative marketing &amp; production scenarios</p><p>The goal is to produce cattle that will be profitable under market conditions in 3 to 5 years.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>2</p><p>2</p><p>2</p></div> <div><p>Why do we need to update NM$?</p><p>New traits can better describe the biology of the cow.</p><p>Production economics change in response to market demands and policy decisions.</p><p>Changes in evaluation methodology or trait definitions can affect calculations.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>3</p><p>3</p><p>3</p></div> <div>TraitRelative emphasis on traits in index (%)PD$1971MFP$1976CY$1984NM$1994NM$2000NM$2003NM$2006NM$2010Milk5227265000Fat4846452521222319Protein27534336332316PL2014111722SCS699910UDC7767FLC4434BDC4346DPR7911SCE2DCE2CA$65<p>Our indices have changed over time</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>4</p><p>4</p><p>4</p></div> <div><p>The economic situation has changed</p><p>Milk prices are higher than predicted in 2010, driven largely by a strong export market, which increases the value of production.</p><p>Replacement prices are lower and beef prices higher than in 2010, which decreases the value of longevity.</p><p>Replacement prices have been volatile.</p><p>Beef futures are forecast to remain high.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>5</p><p>5</p><p>5</p></div> <div><p>Some economic drivers</p><p>Forecast base milk price was $14.93 in 2010, revised to $16.00 last fall, and revised to $18.00 in July.</p><p>Forecast replacement heifer price was $1,910 in 2010, revised to $1,440 last fall, and revised to $1,700 in July.</p><p>Forecast cull cow price was $0.54/pound in 2010, revised to $0.65 last fall, and revised to $0.75 in July.</p><p>Forecast feed costs were revised up by about 15% in July.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>6</p><p>6</p><p>6</p></div> <div><p>We have more traits to describe fertility</p><p>Daughter pregnancy rate from lactation data (1960s to present).</p><p>Heifer and cow conception rates from fertility data (2003 to present).</p><p>Fertility traits benefit from multi-trait processing.</p><p>Genetic correlationsare high and manyobservations aremissing.</p>DPRHCRCCRDPR0.040.410.87HCR0.100.020.54CCR0.700.100.03<p>Heritabilities (diagonal) and genetic</p><p>(above) and phenotypic (below)</p><p>correlations.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>7</p><p>7</p><p>7</p></div> <div><p>Graziers face different challenges</p><p>Graziers face different economic pressures</p><p>Notably, more fertility and less longevity</p><p>GM$ 2014 does not include dairy form, as proposed by Gay et al. (2014).</p><p>Were working with the traits we have.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>8</p><p>8</p><p>8</p></div> <div>TraitRelative emphasis on traits in index (%)NM$2010CM$2014FM$2014GM$2014NM$2014Milk0-82477Fat1920242224Protein162501315PL2216191119SCS10-8-5-67UDC76787FLC43444BDC6-4-4-44DPR1144145HCR1 252CCR 1 23 2CA$ 5 455 5<p>Where are we going?</p><p>More yield</p><p>(44%)</p><p>Less fertility,</p><p>more traits</p><p>(9%)</p><p>Less PL</p><p>(19%)</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>9</p><p>9</p><p>9</p></div> <div><p>Including recessive tests</p><p>There are currently 20 recessives tracked in US dairy cattle.</p><p>Not all are undesirable (e.g., polled).</p><p>Gene dosages are needed in order to include haplotype or SNP tests in NM$.</p><p>Could follow after Gengler et al. (2007) or Van Doormaal and Kistemaker (2008).</p><p>Estimating associated economic values will be challenging.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>Feed costs are problematic</p><p>New data for calculating the feed costs for fat and protein are arriving.</p><p>The current model says protein costs more to make than fat.</p><p>Intake data indicate even higher protein costs, which seems counterintuitive.</p><p>Phenotypic and genetic correlations may differ, as with SCS.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>Subindices may aid interpretation</p><p>Calving ease and stillbirth are combined into a calving ability subindex, CA$.</p><p>This idea could be extended to other trait groups, such as yield and fertility.</p><p>Emphasizes the economic value of the group over individual traits.</p><p>Traits can be added without changing the interpretation of the subindex.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>Conclusions</p><p>More emphasis on yield and less on fertility &amp; longevity in Dec. 2014 NM$.</p><p>NM$ 2014 is correlated by 0.965 with NM$ 2010, and by 0.991 with 2006 NM$.</p><p>Increased genetic progress worth $8 million/year is expected if all breeders select on NM$. </p><p>The addition of GM$ provides a new selection tool for graziers.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>Acknowledgments</p><p>The members of SCC084, Genetic selection and mating strategies to improve the well-being and efficiency of dairy cattle.</p><p>Investigators on AFRI Integrated Project 2011-68004-30340, Genomic Selection and Herd Management for Improved Feed Efficiency of the Dairy Industry.</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p> <div><p>Questions?</p><p>http://gigaom.com/2012/05/31/t-mobile-pits-its-math-against-verizons-the-loser-common-sense/shutterstock_76826245/</p></div> <p>CDCB Open Industry Meeting, Linthicum Heights, MD, August 5, 2014 (#)</p> <p>Cole and VanRaden</p>