PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L D van Vleck

Publications and source records attributed to L D van Vleck.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Implications of cloning for breed improvement strategies: are traditional methods of animal improvement obsolete?

Can the optimum animal be defined? Will that definition change over time, by location, by market demand? First, assume what may be impossible, that the perfect animal can be defined or that only a limited number of definitions of "perfect" are needed. Then, can the "perfect" animal to match a definition be found? Suppose such an animal is found. Then the question to be answered before trying to clone as a method of genetic improvement becomes "Is the animal perfect because of phenotype or genotype?" In other words, the P = G + E problem exists, which requires traditional methods of genetic evaluation and testing to determine whether genotype (G) or random environmental (E) effects or a combination leads to the apparent perfection in the phenotype (P). For most traits, additive genetic variance accounts for 10 to 50% of total variance, a fraction denoted as heritability. With a simple model, the best prediction of genotypic value is to reduce the apparent phenotypic superiority by multiplying by heritability. Cloning the "perfect" animal also could capture optimum dominance and epistatic genetic effects that are otherwise difficult to select for. For some traits, maternal effects are important. In that case, clones as breeding animals must be "perfect" for both direct and maternal genotypes, or alternatively terminal and maternal clone lines would need to be developed. The use of clones to increase uniformity can be only partially successful. If heritability is 25%, then the standard deviation among clones would be 87% of that of uncloned animals. Only if heritability is 100% will clone mates have complete uniformity. Fixing the genotype could increase susceptibility to failure if environment changes or if the cloned genotype is susceptible to a new disease or if economic conditions change. Cloning, at best, is another tool for animal improvement that joins the list of previous biotechnological inventions, some of which have become cost-effective, such as artificial insemination, sexing of semen, multiple ovulation and embryo transfer, embryo sexing, and in vitro fertilization. Cloning has a place in that inventory but, in the long-term, the use of cloning will need to be managed to be cost effective for the improvement of quantitative characters.

Animals↗

Estimates of genetic and environmental (co)variances for first lactation on milk yield, survival, and calving interval.

Variance and covariance components for milk yield, survival to second freshening, calving interval in first lactation were estimated by REML with the expectation and maximization algorithm for an animal model which included herd-year-season effects. Cows without calving interval but with milk yield were included. Each of the four data sets of 15 herds included about 3000 Holstein cows. Relationships across herds were ignored to enable inversion of the coefficient matrix of mixed model equations. Quadratics and their expectations were accumulated herd by herd. Heritability of milk yield (.32) agrees with reports by same methods. Heritabilities of survival (.11) and calving interval(.15) are slightly larger and genetic correlations smaller than results from different methods of estimation. Genetic correlation between milk yield and calving interval (.09) indicates genetic ability to produce more milk is lightly associated with decreased fertility.

Analysis of Variance↗

Approximating prediction error variances for multiple trait sire evaluations.

The coefficient matrix for multiple trait (milk, fat, and protein) mixed model equations may be too large to obtain prediction error variances from inverse elements. The commonly used reciprocals of diagonal elements may not be accurate approximations when sire relationships or multiple traits are included since much information is contained in offdiagonal elements. Approximations incorporating increased information from coefficient matrix were compared with actual prediction error variances for multiple trait evaluations for milk, fat, protein, and dollar value (relationships included) of 229 Ayrshire and 248 Brown Swiss bulls. Six approximations were selection index using number of daughter records, inverses of individual sire diagonal blocks, inverses of group and individual sire blocks, and inverses of all diagonal blocks and offdiagonal blocks associated with individual sires. All approximations under-estimated actual prediction error variances, but most, except selection index, were highly correlated (.90 to .99) with actual prediction error variances of sire evaluations for milk yield and product value for contemporary bulls. The approximation incorporating most information from the coefficient matrix is recommended for use on basis of high correlation with and closeness to actual prediction error variances.

Analysis of Variance↗