Supply of Genetic Information - Amount, Format, and Frequency

Journal of Dairy Science

Volumn 82, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 1052-1060

  Misztal, Ignacy ^a   Lawlor, T J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b Holstein Association USA   (United States)

Author keywords

Continuous evaluation; Genetic evaluation; Mating system

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; BOS TAURUS;

ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BREEDING; CATTLE; GENETIC MARKER; GENETICS; INFORMATION SYSTEM; ONLINE SYSTEM; REVIEW;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; CATTLE; GENETIC MARKERS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MODELS, GENETIC; ONLINE SYSTEMS;

EID: 0033126751     PISSN: 00220302     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75326-9     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Archer, A. A., R. Lacroix, and K. M. Wade. 1998. Implementing decision support systems for dairy herd improvement on the world wide web. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Armidale, New South Wales, Australia 27:415-418.
2. Bailey, C., ed. 1996. Guidelines for uniform beef improvement programs. Beef Improvement Fed., Colby, KS.
3. Benyshek, L. L. 1997. The current status and future for productivity improvements in beef cattle. Illinois World Food Sustainable Agric. Program Conf. Meeting the Demand Food in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities for Illinois Agriculture, May 28, 1997. http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/~ILwfood/papers/ beefpap.PDF. Accessed Feb 23, 1999.
4. 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.)
5. Da, Y., M. Ron, A. Yanai, M. Band, R. E. Everts, D. W. Heyen, J. I. Weller, G. R. Wiggans, and H. A. Lewin. 1994. The dairy bull DNA repository: a resource for mapping quantitative trait loci. Proc. 5th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Guelph, ON, Canada 21:229-232.
6. Fernando, R. L., and M. Grossman. 1989. Marker-assisted selection using best linear unbiased prediction. Genet. Sel. Evol. 21:467-477.
7. Ferris, T. A., I. L. Mao, and C. R. Anderson. 1985. Selecting for lactation curve and milk yield in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 68: 1438-1448.
8. Gavora, J. S., R. W. Fairfull, B. F. Benkel, W. J. Cantwell, and J. R. Chambers. 1996. Prediction of heterosis from DNA finger-prints in chickens. Genetics 144:777-784.
9. Goddard, M. E. 1992. Optimal effective population-size for the global population of Black-and-white dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 75:2902-2911.
10. Goddard, M. E. 1992. A mixed model for analyses of data on multiple genetic markers. Theor. Appl. Genet. 83:878-886.
11. Goetz, K. U., and G. Thaller. 1998. Assignment of individuals to populations using microsatellites. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 115: 53-61.
12. Golden, B. L. 1998. The world wide web: HTML, CGI and Java applications in animal breeding. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Armidale, New South Wales, Australia 27: 409-414.
13. Golden, B. L., J. S. Brinks, and R. M. Bourdon. 1991. A performance programmed method for computing inbreeding coefficients from large data sets for use in mixed-model analyses. J. Anim. Sci. 69:3564-3573.
14. Grignola, F. E., J. Jamrozik, L. Varona, I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 1998. A random regression approach to estimate variance components for longitudinal records in beef cattle via Gibbs sampling. J. Animal Sci. 76(Suppl. 1):57.(Abstr.)
15. Grunder, A. A., M. P. Sabour, and J. S. Gavora. 1994. Estimates of relatedness and inbreeding in goose strains from DNA finger-prints. Anim. Genet. 25(Suppl. 1):81-88.
16. Hoeschele, 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.
17. Hoyt, R. 1993. Continuous evaluation in dairy cattle: an AI industry perspective - I. Pages 49-51 in Proc. Symp. Continuous Eval. Dairy Cattle. I. Misztal, ed. Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD.
18. International Bull Evaluation Service. 1992. Sire evaluation procedures for dairy production traits practised in various countries. Bull. No. 5. Dep. Anim. Breed. Genet., SLU, Uppsala, Sweden.
19. International Bull Evaluation Service. 1996. Sire evaluation procedures for non-dairy-production and growth and beef production traits practised in various countries. Bull. No. 13. Dep. Anim. Breed. Genet., SLU, Uppsala, Sweden.
20. Kettunen, A., E. A. Mätysaari, I. Strandén, J. Pösö, and M. Lidauer. 1998. Estimation of genetic parameters for first lactation test day milk production using random regression models. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Armidale, New South Wales, Australia 23:307-310.
21. Klei, L., and T. J. Lawlor. 1998. MACE for conformation traits. Pages 15-21 in Proc. Open Session INTERBULL Annu. Mtg. Jan. 18-19. Rotorua, New Zealand. INTERBULL, Uppsala, Sweden.
22. Lin, E. C., P. J. Berger, and R. N. Goodwin. 1995. Enhanced estimates of (co)variance components from multiple trait analysis using EM algorithm REML. J. Anim. Sci. 72(Suppl. 1): 117.(Abstr.)
23. Lohuis, M. M., J.C.M. Dekkers, C. Smith, and L. R. Schaeffer. 1993. The effect of continuous evaluation on genetic response in progeny test programs. Pages 2-18 in Proc. Symp. Continuous Eval. Dairy cattle. I. Misztal, ed. Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD.
24. Reference deleted in proof.
25. MacNeil, M. D., S. Newman, W. R. Lamberson, and Z. Hoffman. 1998. Decision support systems to aid beef producers in choosing a crossbreeding strategy. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Armidale, New South Wales, Australia 27: 437-440.
26. Meyer, K. 1995. Estimates of genetic-parameters for mature weight of Australian beef-cows and its relationship to early growth and skeletal measures. Livest. Prod. Sci. 44:125-137.
27. Miller, P. D. 1993. Continuous evaluation in dairy cattle: an AI industry perspective - II. Pages 52-53 in Proc. Symp. Continuous Eval. Dairy Cattle. I. Misztal, ed. Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD.
28. Misztal, I., ed. 1993. Proc. Symp. Continuous Eval. Dairy Cattle. Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD.
29. Misztal, I. 1993. Technical considerations in implementation of continuous genetic evaluation. Pages 29-39 in Proc. Symp. Continuous Eval. Dairy Cattle. I. Misztal, ed. Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD.
30. Misztal, I. 1997. Estimation of variance components with large-scale dominance models. J. Dairy Sci. 80:965-974.
31. Misztal, I., G. R. Wiggans, T. J. Lawlor, and T. Short. 1991. Continuous genetic evaluation of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 74: 2001-2009.
32. Moser, D. W., J. K. Bertrand, and L. L. Benyshek. 1996. Effects of selection for scrotal circumference in Limousin bulls on reproductive and growth traits of progeny. J. Anim. Sci. 74: 2052-2057.
33. National Swine Improvement Federation. 1998. Guidelines for uniform swine improvement programs. 1998. http:// mark.asci.ncsu.edu/NSIF. Accessed Feb 23, 1999.
34. Nejati-Navaremi, A., C. Smith, and J. P. Gibson. Effect of total allelic relationship on accuracy of evaluation and response to selection. J. Anim. Sci. 75:1738-1745.
35. Ptak, E., and L. R. Schaeffer. 1993. Use of test day yields for genetic evaluation of dairy sires and cows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 34: 23-34.
36. Snelling, W. M., B. L. Golden, and R. M. Bourdon. 1995. Withinherd genetic analyses of stayability of beef females. J. Anim. Sci. 73:993-1001.
37. Thallman, R. M., G. L. Benett, J. W. Keele, and S. M. Kappes. 1998. User of marker information on a subset of sires to follow segregation through a complex pedigree. J. Anim. Sci. 76(Suppl. 1):55.(Abstr.)
38. VanRaden, P. M. 1997. Lactation yields and accuracies computed from test day yields and (co)variances by best prediction. J. Dairy Sci. 80:3015-3022.
39. VanRaden, P. M. 1998. Best prediction of lactation yield and persistency. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Armidale, New South Wales, Australia 23:347-350.
40. Varona, L., and I. Misztal. 1998. Prediction of parental dominance combinations for planned matings. Methodology and simulation results. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Armidale, New South Wales, Australia 25:593-596.
41. Varona, L., C. Moreno, L. A. Garcia Cortes, and J. Altariba. 1997. Multiple trait analysis of underlying biological variables of production functions. Livest. Prod. Sci. 47:210-219.
42. Varona, L., C. Moreno, L. A. Garcia Cortes, and J. Altariba. 1998. Bayesian analysis of Wood's lactation curve for Spanish dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 81:1469-1478.
43. Visscher, P. M., M. Mackinnon, and C. S. Haley. 1997. Efficiency of marker assisted selection. Anim. Biotechnol. 8:99-106.
44. Welper, R. D. 1993. Continuous evaluation in dairy cattle: an AI industry perspective - III. Pages 54-58 in Proc. Symp. Continuous Eval. Dairy Cattle. I. Misztal, ed. Univ. Maryland, College Park, MD.
45. 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.
46. Wilmink, J.B.M. 1987. Comparison of different methods of predicting 305-day milk yield using means calculated from within-herd lactation curves. Livest. Prod. Sci. 17:1-17.