Comparisons of cows and herds in two progeny testing programs and two corresponding states

Journal of Dairy Science

Volumn 82, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 822-828

  Vierhout, C N ^a,b   Cassell, B G ^a   Pearson, R E ^a  

^a VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Pedigree selection; Progeny tests; Variance; Young sires

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION; BREEDING; CATTLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; GENETICS; LACTATION; MALE; REPRODUCTION;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; CATTLE; FEMALE; INSEMINATION, ARTIFICIAL; LACTATION; MALE; REPRODUCTION;

EID: 0033113079     PISSN: 00220302     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75302-6     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Dekkers, J.C.M., G. E. Vandervoort, and E. B. Burnside. 1996. Optimal size of progeny groups for progeny-testing programs by artificial insemination firms. J. Dairy Sci. 79:2056-2070.
2. Hunt, M. S., E. B. Burnside, M. G. Freeman, and J. W. Wilton. 1972. Impact of selection, testing, and operational procedures on genetic progress in a progeny-testing artificial insemination stud. J. Dairy Sci. 55:829-839.
3. Losinger, W. C., and A. J. Heinrichs. 1996. Dairy operation management practices and herd milk production. J. Dairy Sci. 79:506-514.
4. Majeskie, J. L. 1996. Status of United States dairy cattle. Natl. Coop. DHI Prog. Handbook, Fact Sheet K-7. Natl. DHIA, Columbus, OH.
5. Meinert, T. R., H. D. Norman, J. M. Mattison, and C. G. Sattler. 1997. Usability for evaluations of records in progeny test programs of artificial insemination organizations. J. Dairy Sci. 80: 2599-2605.
6. Meinert, T. R., R. E. Pearson, and R. S. Hoyt. 1992. Estimates of genetic trend in an artificial insemination progeny test program and their association with herd characteristics. J. Dairy Sci. 75:2254-2264.
7. Norman, H. L., G. Waite, G. R. Wiggans, and L. M. Walton. 1994. Improving accuracy of the United States genetic database with a new editing system for dairy records. J. Dairy Sci. 77: 3198-3208.
8. Othenacu, P. A., and C. W. Young. 1974. Genetic optimization of young bull sampling program in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 57: 894-897.
9. Othenacu, P. A., and C. W. Young. 1974. Genetic and financial considerations of progeny testing programs in an artificial insemination dairy cattle population. J. Dairy Sci. 57:1245-1253.
10. Smith, L. A., B. G. Cassell, and R. E. Pearson. 1998. The effects of inbreeding on lifetime performance of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2729-2737.
11. VanRaden, P. M., H. D. Norman, R. L. Powell, and G. R. Wiggans 1996. Changes in USDA-DHIA genetic evaluations (July 1996). AIPL Res. Rep. 1996; CH6. http:// www.aipl.arsusda.gov/pdfdocs/chng967.pdf. Accessed Jan 6, 1998.
12. Vierhout, C. N., B. G. Cassell, and R. E. Pearson. 1998. Influences of progeny test programs on the genetic evaluations of young sires. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2524-2532.
13. Wiggans, G. R., P. M. VanRaden, and J. Zuurbier. 1995. Calculation and use of inbreeding coefficients for genetic evaluation of United States dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 78:1584-1590.