Studies on the value of incorporating the effect of dominance in genetic evaluations of dairy cattle, Beef cattle and swine;Étude de l’intérêt de l’incorporation de l’effet de dominance dans l’évaluation génétique des bovins laitiers, Des bovines viandeux et des porcs

Biotechnology, Agronomy and Society and Environment

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 227-233

  Misztal, Ignacy ^a   Varona, Luis ^a   Culbertson, Matthew ^a,b   Keith Bertrand, J ^a   Mabry, John ^a   Lawlor, Thomas J ^c   Van Tassel, Curtis P ^d   Gengler, Nicolas ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b Cotswold USA ^*  (United States)

^c Holstein Association of America   (United States)

^d AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

^e Laboratoire d Écologie Universitaire des Sciences agronomiques de Gembloux   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Computerized mating system; Dominance; Genetic evaluation; Internet; Livestock; Method ; Variance components

Indexed keywords

BOS; SUIDAE;

EID: 33750469460     PISSN: 13706233     EISSN: 17804507     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Boswerger BHG., Lawlor TJ., Allaire FR. (1994). Expected progeny production gain by balancing inbreeding depression and selection. J. Dairy Sci. 77 (Suppl.1), p. 201.
2. Cockerham CC. (1954). An extension of the concept of partitioning hereditary variance for analysis of variance when epistasis is present. Genetics 39, p. 859–882.
3. Culbertson MS., Mabry J W., Misztal I., Gengler N., Bertrand JK., Varona L. (1997). Estimation of dominance variance in purebred Yorkshire swine. J. Anim. Sci. 76, p. 448–451
4. de Boer IJM., Hoeschele I. (1993). Genetic evaluation methods for populations with dominance and inbreeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 86, p. 245–258.
5. De Stefano AL., Hoeschele I. (1992). Utilization of dominance variance through mate allocation strategies. J. Dairy Sci. 75, p. 1680–1690.
6. Gengler N., Misztal I., Bertrand JK. (1997a). Relationships between estimates of heterosis and dominance variance for post-weaning gain in US Limousin cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 75 (Suppl. 1), p. 149.
7. Gengler N., Van Vleck LD., MacNeil MD., Misztal I., Pariacote FA. (1997b). Influence of dominance relationships on the estimation of dominance variance with sire-dam subclass effects. J. Anim. Sci. 7 5, p. 2885–2891.
8. Gengler N., Misztal I., Bertrand JK., Culbertson M S. (1998). Estimation of the dominance variance for postweaning gain in the US Limousin population. J. Anim. Sci. 76, p. 2515–2520.
9. Henderson CR. (1984). Applications of linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, Canada. ISBN 0-88955-030-1.
10. Henderson CR. (1985). Best linear unbiased prediction of nonadditive genetic merits in noninbred populations. J. Anim. Sci. 60, p. 111–117.
11. Henderson CR. (1989). Prediction of merits of potential matings from sire-maternal grandsire models with nonadditive genetic effects. J. Dairy Sci. 7 2, p. 2592–2605.
12. Hoeschele I., VanRaden PM. (1991). Rapid inversion of dominance relationship matrices for noninbred populations by including sire by dam subclass effects. J. Dairy Sci. 74, p. 557–569.
13. Lawlor TJ., Weigel KA., Misztal I. (1993). Implications of incorporating inbreeding information into animal model evaluations for type. J. Dairy Sci. 76 (Suppl. 1), p. 292.
14. Lawlor TJ., Klei L., Misztal I., Varona L. (1998). Managing inbreeding and utilizing dominance effects in a herd mating program. J. Dairy Sci. 81 (Suppl. 1) (in press).
15. Misztal I. (1995). Feasibility of a large-scale evaluation with the dominance effect. J. Dairy Sci. 78 (Suppl. 1), p. 247.
16. Misztal I. (1997). Estimation of variance components with l a rge-scale dominance models. J. Dairy Sci. 80, p. 965–974.
17. Misztal I., Gianola D. (1987). Indirect solution of mixed model equations. J. Dairy Sci. 70, p. 716–723.
18. Misztal I., Fernando RL., Grossman M., Lawlor T J., Lukaszewicz M. (1995). Dominance and epistatic effects in genetic evaluation of farm animals. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 13, p. 251–266.
19. Misztal I., Lawlor TJ., Gengler N. (1997). Relationships among estimates of inbreeding depression, dominance and additive variance for linear traits in Holsteins. Genet. Sel. Evol. 29, p. 319–326.
20. Misztal I, Varona L., Culbertson M., Gengler N., Bertrand JK., Mabry J., Lawlor TJ., Van Tassell C P. (1998). Studies on the value of incorporating effect of dominance in genetic evaluations of dairy cattle, beef cattle, and swine. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 25, p. 513–516.
21. Reverter A., Golden BL., Bourdon RM. (1994). Method  variance components procedure: application on the simple breeding value model. J. Anim. Sci. 72, p. 2247–2253.
22. Uimari P., Kennedy B W. (1990). Mixed model methodology to estimate additive and dominance genetic values under complete dominance and inbreeding. Proc. 4th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 13, p. 297–300.
23. Van Raden PM., Lawlor TJ., Short TH., Hoeschele I. (1992). Use of reproductive technology to estimate variances and predict effects of gene interactions. J. Dairy Sci. 75, p. 2892–2901.
24. Varona L., Misztal I. (1998). Prediction of parental dominance combinations for planned matings. Methodology and simulation results. Proc. 6th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod. 25, p. 593–596.
25. Varona L., Misztal I., Bertrand JK., Lawlor TJ. (1998). Effect of full-sibs on additive breeding values under the dominance model for stature in United States Holsteins. J. Dairy Sci. 81, p. 1126–1135.