Comparison of Selection by Independent Culling Levels for Below-Average Birth Weight and High Yearling Weight with Mass Selection for High Yearling Weight in Line 1 Hereford Cattle

Journal of Animal Science

Volumn 76, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 458-467

  MacNeil, M D ^a   Urick, J J ^a   Snelling, W M ^a  

^a AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Beef Cattle; Calving; Genetic Trend; Growth Factors; Selection

Indexed keywords

AGING; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIRTH WEIGHT; BODY WEIGHT; BREEDING; CATTLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; FERTILITY; GENETICS; GENOME IMPRINTING; HISTOLOGY; INBREEDING; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NEWBORN; UNITED STATES;

AGING; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; ANIMALS, NEWBORN; BIRTH WEIGHT; BODY WEIGHT; BREEDING; CATTLE; FEMALE; FERTILITY; GENOMIC IMPRINTING; INBREEDING; MALE; MONTANA;

EID: 0031992966     PISSN: 00218812     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2527/1998.762458x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arnold, J. W., J. K. Bertrand, L. L. Benyshek, J. W. Comerford, and T. E. Kiser. 1990. Selection for low birth weight and high yearling weight in Angus beef cattle. Livest. Prod. Sci. 25: 31-41.
2. Bellows, R. A., R. E. Short, D. C. Anderson, B. W. Knapp, and O. F. Pahnish. 1971. Cause and effect relationships associated with calving difficulty and calf birth weight. J. Anim. Sci. 33: 407-145.
3. Bellows, R. A., R. E. Short, and G. V. Richardson. 1982. Effects of sire, age of dam, and gestation feed level on dystocia and postpartum reproduction. J. Anim. Sci. 55:18-27.
4. Bennett, G. L. 1997. Selection for calving ease. Proc. Beef Improv. Fed. 29th Annu. Mtg. Res. Symp., May 14-17, Dickenson, ND. (In press).
5. Boldman, K. G., L. A. Kriese, L. D. Van Vleck, and S. D. Kachman. 1993. A manual for use of MTDFREML. A set of programs to obtain estimates of variances and covariances (draft). USDA, ARS, Lincoln, NE.
6. Brinks, J. S., R. T. Clark, N. M. Kieffer, and J. J. Urick. 1964. Estimates of genetic, environmental and phenotypic parameters in range Hereford females. J. Anim. Sci. 23:711.
7. Brinks, J. S., R. T. Clark, and F. J. Rice. 1961. Estimation of genetic trends in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 20:903 (Abstr.).
8. Brinks, J. S., J. J. Urick, O. F. Pahnish, B. W. Knapp, and T. J. Riley. 1967. Heterosis in preweaning and weaning traits among lines of Hereford cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 26:278.
9. Dickerson, G. E., N. Künzi, L. V. Cundiff, R. M. Koch, V. H. Arthaud, and K. E. Gregory. 1974. Selection criteria for efficient beef production. J. Anim. Sci. 39:659.
10. Doornbos, D. E., D. D. Kress, D. C. Anderson, and K. C. Davis. 1994. Genetic trends for a selection index and growth traits in Herefords selected for light birth weight and greater growth rate. J. Anim. Sci.(Suppl. 1)72:203. (Abstr.).
11. Hanset, R. 1981. Selection problems when antagonistic effects exist between production characteristics and calving difficulties. Livest. Prod. Sci. 8:291.
12. Hoeschele, I., D. Gianola, and J. L. Foulley. 1987. Estimation of variance components with quasi-continuous data using Bayesian methods. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 104:334.
13. Koch, R. M., L. V. Cundiff, and K. E. Gregory. 1994. Cumulative selection and genetic change for weaning or yearling weight or for yearling weight plus muscle score in Hereford cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 72:864.
14. Kriese, L. A., L. D. Van Vleck, K. E. Gregory, K. G. Boldman, L. V. Cundiff, and R. M. Koch. 1994. Estimates of genetic parameters for 320-day pelvic measurements of males and females and calving ease of 2-year-old females. J. Anim. Sci. 72:1954.
15. Laster, D. B., H. A. Glimp, L. V. Cundiff, and K. E. Gregory. 1973. Factors affecting dystocia and the effects of dystocia on subsequent reproduction in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 36:695.
16. MacNeil M. D., and W. M. Snelling. 1996. Systematic error in genetic evaluation of Miles City Line 1 Hereford cattle resulting from preadjustment for age of dam. J. Anim. Sci. 74:1794.
17. MacNeil, M. D., J. J. Urick, S. Newman, and B. W. Knapp. 1992. Selection for postweaning growth in inbred Hereford cattle: the Fort Keogh, Montana Line 1 example. J. Anim. Sci. 70:723.
18. Menissier, F., J. L. Foulley, and W. A. Pattie. 1981. The calving ability of the Charolais breed in France and its possibilities for genetic improvement. III. Genetic improvement of calving ability in the Charolais as a maternal breed. Ir. Vet. J. 35:128.
19. Meuwissen, T.H.E., J. P. Gibson, and M. Quinton. 1995. Genetic improvement of production while maintaining fitness. Theor. Appl. Genet. 90:627.
20. Meyer, K. 1991. Estimating variances and covariances for multivariate animal models by restricted maximum likelihood. Genet. Sel. Evol. 23:67.
21. Meyer, K. 1992. Variance components due to direct and maternal effects for growth traits of Australian beef cattle. Livest. Prod. Sci. 31:179.
22. Mrode, R. A. 1988. Selection experiments in beef cattle. Part 2: A review of responses and correlated responses. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 56:155.
23. Newman, J. A., G. W. Rahnefeld, and H. T. Fredeen. 1973. Selection intensity and response to selection for yearling weight in beef cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 53:1.
24. Pollak, E. J., J. van der Werf, and R. L. Quaas. 1984. Selection bias and multiple trait evaluation. J. Dairy Sci. 67:1590.
25. Smith, G. M., H. A. Fitzhugh, Jr., L. V. Cundiff, T. C. Cartwright, and K. E. Gregory. 1976. A genetic analysis of maturing patterns in straightbred and crossbred Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 43:389.
26. th Int. Congr. Genet. 1:206.
27. Urick, J. J., J. S. Brinks, O. F. Pahnish, B. W. Knapp, and T. M. Riley. 1968. Heterosis in postweaning traits among lines of Hereford cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 27:323.
28. Waldron, D. F., C. A. Morris, R. L. Baker, and D. L. Johnson. 1993. Maternal effects for growth traits in beef cattle. Livest. Prod. Sci. 34:57.