Effect of Full Sibs on Additive Breeding Values under the Dominance Model for Stature in United States Holsteins

Journal of Dairy Science

Volumn 81, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 1126-1135

  Varona, L ^a   Misztal, I ^a   Bertrand, J K ^a   Lawlor, T J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b Holstein Association USA   (United States)

Author keywords

Dominance; Inbreeding; Mating system

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOMETRY; BREEDING; CATTLE; FEMALE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; INBREEDING; MALE; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALS; BIOMETRY; BREEDING; CATTLE; FEMALE; INBREEDING; MALE; MODELS, GENETIC; UNITED STATES; VARIATION (GENETICS);

EID: 0032038810     PISSN: 00220302     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)75675-9     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Boswerger, B.H.G, T. J. Lawlor, and F. R. Allaire. 1994. Expected progeny production gain by balancing inbreeding depression and selection. J. Dairy Sci. 77(Suppl. 1):201.(Abstr.)
2. Cantet, R. J. 1997. Effects of excluding a set of random effects on prediction error variance of breeding value. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 114:267.
3. Culbertson, M. S., J. W. Mabry, I. Misztal, and N. E. Gengler. 1997. Estimation of dominance variance in swine. J. Anim. Sci. 75(Suppl. 1):144.(Abstr.)
4. DeStefano, A. L., and I. Hoeschele. 1992. Utilization of dominance through mate allocation strategies. J. Dairy Sci. 75:1680-1690.
5. Falconer, D. S. 1989. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Longman Sci. Tech. Publ., London, England.
6. Gengler, N., I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 1997. Relationships between estimates of heterosis and dominance variance for post-weaning gain in US Limousin cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 75(Suppl. 1):149.(Abstr.)
7. Henderson, C. R. 1984. Applications of Linear Models in Animal Breeding. Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
8. Henderson, C. R. 1985. Equivalent linear models to reduce computations. J. Dairy Sci. 68:2267-2277.
9. Henderson, C. R. 1989. Prediction of merits of potential matings from sire-maternal grandsire models with nonadditive genetic effects. J. Dairy Sci. 72:2592-2605.
10. Höschele I, and P. M. VanRaden, 1991. Rapid inversion of dominance relationship matrices for noninbred populations by including sire by dam subclass effects. J. Dairy Sci. 74:557-569.
11. Lawlor, T. J., K. A. Weigel, and I. Misztal. 1993. Implications of incorporating inbreeding information into animal model evaluations for type. J. Dairy Sci. 76(Suppl. 1):292.(Abstr.)
12. Miglior, F., and E. B. Burnside. 1995. Inbreeding of Canadian Holstein cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 78:1163-1167.
13. Misztal, I. 1997. Estimation of variance components with large-scale dominance models. J. Dairy Sci. 80:965-974.
14. Misztal, I., T. J. Lawlor, and R. L. Fernando. 1997. Studies on dominance models by method R for stature of Holsteins. J. Dairy Sci. 80:975-978.
15. Schaeffer, L. R. 1983. Technique for partitioning sire evaluations. J. Dairy Sci. 66:1519-1527.
16. VanRaden P. M., T. J. Lawlor, T. H. Short, and I. Höschele, 1992. Use of reproductive technology to estimate variances and predict effects of gene interactions. J. Dairy Sci. 75:2892-2901.
17. VanRaden P. M., and G. R. Wiggans. 1991. Derivation, calculation, and use of national animal model information. J. Dairy Sci. 74:2737-2746.
18. Wiggans, G. R., I. Misztal, and L. D. Van Vleck. 1988. Implementation of an animal model for genetic evaluation of dairy cattle in the United States. J. Dairy Sci. 71(Suppl. 2):54-69.
19. Young, C. W., and A. J. Seykora. 1996. Estimates of inbreeding and relationship among registered Holstein females in the United States. J. Dairy Sci. 79:502-505.