Comparison of threshold vs linear and animal vs sire models for predicting direct and maternal genetic effects on calving difficulty in beef cattle

Journal of Animal Science

Volumn 79, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 333-338

  Ramirez Valverde, R ^a   Misztal, I ^a   Bertrand, J K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Beef Cattle; Dystocia; Threshold Models

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIRTH WEIGHT; CATTLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DYSTOCIA; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETICS; MALE; PARITY; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PREGNANCY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMALS; BIRTH WEIGHT; CATTLE; DYSTOCIA; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PARITY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREGNANCY;

EID: 0035259514     PISSN: 00218812     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2527/2001.792333x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Clutter, A. C., P. J. Berger, and J. M. Mattison. 1989. Threshold model analysis of dystocia in dairy cattle when progeny information is limited. J. Dairy Sci. 72:3264-3272.
2. Foulley, J. L., D. Gianola, and R. Thompson. 1983. Prediction of genetic merit from data on binary and quantitative variates with an application to calving difficulty, birth weight and pelvic opening. Genet. Sel. Evol. 15:401-424.
3. Gianola, D. 1982. Theory and analysis of threshold characters. J. Anim. Sci. 54:1079-1096.
4. Gianola, D., and J. L. Foulley. 1983. Sire evaluation for ordered categorical data with a threshold model. Genet. Sel. Evol. 15:201-224.
5. Gilmour, A. R., R. D. Anderson, and A. C. Rae. 1985. The analysis of binomial data by a generalized linear mixed model. Biometrika 72:593-599.
6. Hagger, C., and A. Hofer. 1989. Correlations between breeding values of dairy sires for frequency of dystocia evaluated by a linear and non linear method. J. Anim. Sci. 67(Suppl.1):88 (Abstr.).
7. Harville, D. A., and R. W. Mee. 1984. A mixed-model procedure for analyzing ordered categorical data. Biometrics 40:393-408.
8. Hoeschele, I. 1988. Comparison of "maximum a posteriori estimation" and "quasi best linear unbiased estimation" with threshold characters. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 105:337-361.
9. Janss, L. L. G., and J. L. Foulley. 1993. Bivariate analysis for one continuous and one threshold dichotomous trait with unequal design matrices and an application to birth weight and calving difficulty. Livest. Prod. Sci. 33:183-198.
10. Kriese, L. A., J. K. Bertrand, and L. L. Benyshek. 1991. Age adjustment factors, heritabilities and genetic correlations for scrotal circumference and related growth traits in Hereford and Brangus bulls. J. Anim. Sci. 69:478-489.
11. Manfredi, E. J., M. San Cristobal, and J. L. Foulley. 1991. Some factors affecting the estimation of genetic parameters for cattle dystocia under a threshold model. Anim. Prod. 151-156.
12. Matos, C. A. P., D. L. Thomas, D. Gianola, M. Perez-Enciso, and L. D. Young. 1997. Genetic analysis of discrete reproductive traits in sheep using linear and nonlinear models. II. Goodness of fit and predictive ability. J. Anim. Sci. 75:88-94.
13. Mayer, M. 1995. Inequality of maximum a-posteriori estimators with equivalent sire and animal models for threshold traits. Genet. Sel. Evol. 27:423-435.
14. McCarthy, P. J. 1976. The use of balanced half-sample replication in cross-validation studies. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 71:596-604.
15. Meijering, A., and D. Gianola. 1985. Linear versus nonlinear methods of sire evaluation for categorical traits: A simulation study. Genet. Sel. Evol. 17:115-131.
16. Misztal, I. 1999. Complex models, more data: Simpler programming? Interbull Proceedings of the Computational Cattle Breeding '99. Bull. No. 20:33-42.
17. Olesen, I., M. Perez-Enciso, D. Gianola, and D. L. Thomas. 1994. A comparison of normal and nonnormal mixed models for number of lambs born in Norwegian sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 72:1166-1173.
18. Picard, R. R., and R. D. Cook. 1984. Cross-validation of regression models. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 79:575-583.
19. Renand, G., L. L. G. Janss, and J. Gaillard. 1990. Sire evaluation for direct effects on dystocia by linear and threshold models. Proc. 4th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 13:465-467.
20. Shao, J. 1993. Linear model selection by cross-validation. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 88:486-494.
21. Snee, R. D. 1977. Validation of regression models: Methods and examples. Technometrics 19:415-428.
22. Stone, M. 1974. Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. 36:111-147.
23. Thompson, R. 1979. Sire evaluation. Biometrics 35:339-353.
24. Varona, L., I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 1999a. Threshold-linear versus linear-linear analysis of birth weight and calving ease using an animal model. I. Variance component estimation. J. Anim. Sci. 77:1994-2002.
25. Varona, L., I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 1999b. Threshold-linear versus linear-linear analysis of birth weight and calving ease using an animal model. II. Comparison of models J. Anim. Sci. 77:2003-2007.
26. Weller, J. I., I. Misztal, and D. Gianola. 1988. Genetic analysis of dystocia and calf mortality in Israeli-Holsteins by threshold and linear models. J. Dairy. Sci. 71:2491-2501.
27. Wright, S. 1934. An analysis of variability in number of digits in an inbred strain of guinea pigs. Genetics 19:506-536.