Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T08:43:22.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genotype X environment interactions in dairy cattle: a New Zealand perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

C. W. Holmes
C. W. Holmes*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access

Abstract

In recent genotype X environment studies between New Zealand and Canada, yields of fat and protein from Holstein Friesian (HF) cows were similar for daughters of sires from both countries, but Canadian daughters produced larger volumes of milk (6500 kg v. 3300 kg) and were taller. There was no interaction between the sire's national strain and the daughter's environment but there was a significant interaction between-individual sires within-strain and the daughter's environment so that the correlations between the sire proofs in the two countries were approximately half of the expected values.

In New Zealand, milk production by cows of high or low genetic merit has been found to be affected similarly by differences in stocking rate, level of feeding and body condition at calving, providing no evidence of a large genotype X management interaction, although there is some evidence of an interaction between the effects of breed size and feeding, with smaller breeds being affected less severely by lower feeding level and clear evidence of genotype by milking management interactions. Over the past 40 years the need for pre-milking stimulation in New Zealand cows has been reduced or eliminated by inadvertent selection. Other recent evidence suggests that progress for genetic tolerance to once-daily milking may be possible.

It can be concluded that interactions between group-average genotype and nutritional environment are not likely to have important effects on milk solid yields, at least within the HF breed, within the range of conditions normally found in temperate dairy systems, and provided that the environment is imposed from birth. However, there are likely to be significant interactions between the genotype of individual sires and environment and thus appropriate assessment and ranking of sires in each environment is essential.

Type
Research Article
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 19: Breeding and Feeding the High Genetic Merit Dairy Cow , 1995 , pp. 51 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Production 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahlborn, G. and Bryant, A. M. 1992. Production, economic performance and optimum stocking rates of Holstein Friesian and Jersey cows. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 52: 7–9.Google Scholar
Ahlborn, G. and Demfle, L. 1992. Genetic parameters for milk production and body size in New Zealand Holstein Friesian and Jersey cattle. Livestock Production Science 31: 205–219.Google Scholar
Arendonk, J. A. M. van, , Hovenier, R. and Boer, W. de, . 1989. Phenotypic and genetic association between fertility and production in dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 21:1–12.Google Scholar
Bar Anan, R., Heiman, M., Ron, M. and Weller, J. I. 1987. Comparison of proven sires from five Holstein Friesian strains in high yield Israeli dairy herds. Livestock Production Science 17: 305–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, M. A., Pearson, R. E. and Lukes-Wilson, A. J. 1990. Effects of milking frequency and selection for milk yield on productive efficiency of Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 73:1603–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonczek, R. R., Richardson, D. O., Moore, E. D., Miller, R. H., Owen, J. R., Dowlen, H. H. and Bell, B. R. 1992. Correlated response in reproduction accompanying selection for milk yield in Jerseys. Journal of Dairy Science 75: 1154–1160.Google Scholar
Brumby, P. J. 1961. Causes of differences in production between dairy herds. Animal Production 3: 277–293.Google Scholar
Bryant, A. M. 1983. The effect of breeding index on the performance of non-lactating Jersey cattle. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 43: 63–66.Google Scholar
Bryant, A. M. 1993. Friesians and Jersey. Dairying Research Corporation, Hamilton, Research Update, June 1993, p. 3.Google Scholar
Carabaño, M. J., Van Vleck, L. D., Wiggans, G. R. and Alenda, R. 1989. Estimation of genetic parameters for milk and fat yields of dairy cattle in Spain and the United States. Journal of Dairy Science 72: 3013–3022.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carter, A. H. 1964. How important is dairy merit. Ruakura Farmers Conference, pp. 188–201.Google Scholar
Davey, A. W. F., Grainger, C., McKenzie, D. D. S., Flux, D. S., Wilson, G. F., Brookes, I. M. and Holmes, C. W. 1983. Nutritional and physiological studies of differences between Friesian cows of high and low genetic merit. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 43: 181–187.Google Scholar
Dewhurst, R. J. and Knight, C. H. 1994. Relationship between milk storage characteristics and the short term response of dairy cows to thrice daily milking. Animal Production 58: 181–187.Google Scholar
Dunklee, J. S., Freeman, A. E. and Kelley, D. H. 1994. Comparisons of Holsteins selected for high and average milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 1890–1896.Google Scholar
Freeman, A. E. 1988. Breeding programmes in dairy cattle — current and future considerations. In Animal breeding opportunities, occasional publication, British Society of Animal Production, no. 12, pp. 129–152.Google Scholar
Graham, N. J., Burnside, E. B., Gibson, J. P., Rapitta, A. E. and McBride, B. W. 1991. Comparison of daughters of Canadian and New Zealand Holstein sires for first lactation efficiency of production in relation to body size and condition. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 71: 293–300.Google Scholar
Grainger, C., Davey, A. W. F. and Holmes, C. W. 1985. The performance of Friesian cows with high and low breeding indexes. Animal Production 40: 379–388.Google Scholar
Grindal, R. J. and Hillerton, J. E. 1991. Influence of milkflow rate on new intramammary infection in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Research 58: 263–268.Google Scholar
Hageman, W. H., Shook, G. E. and Tyler, W. J. 1991. Reproductive performance in genetic lines selected for high or average milk yield. Journal of Dairy Science 74:4366–4376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayman, R. H. 1972. Bos indicus and Bos taurus crossbred dairy cattle in Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 519–532.Google Scholar
Holmes, C. W., Brookes, I. M., Ngarmsak, S., Mitchell, K. D. and Davey, A. W. F. 1985. Effects of level of feeding at different times of year on milk production by Friesian cows of high or low genetic merit. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 45:13–16.Google Scholar
Holmes, C. W. 1988. Genetic merit and efficiency of milk production by the dairy cow. In Nutrition and lactation in the dairy cow (ed. Garnsworthy, P. C.), Butterworths, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Jasiorowski, H., Reklewski, Z. and Stolzman, M. 1983. Polish experiment on the comparison of ten Friesian cattle strains. International Dairy Federation, document 165, pp. 7–19.Google Scholar
Jones, W. P., Hansen, L. B., and Chester-Jones, H. 1992. Health costs of a genetic control population versus daughters of highest A.I. bulls for transmitting milk yield. Journal of Dairy Science 75: Supple. 1, p. 146.Google Scholar
Kellaway, R. C. and Colditz, P. J. 1975. The effects of heat stress on growth and nitrogen metabolism in Friesian and Brahman X Friesian heifers. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 26: 615–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamb, R. G., Walters, M. J., Anderson, M. J., Plowman, R. D., Mickelson, C. H. and Miller, R. H. 1977. Effects of sire and interaction of sire with ration on efficiency of feed utilization by Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 60: 1755–1767.Google Scholar
Legates, J. E. and Myers, R. M. 1988. Measuring genetic change in a dairy herd using a control population. Journal of Dairy Science 71:1025–1033.Google Scholar
Legates, J. E. 1990. Efficiency of feed utilisation in Holsteins selected for yield. Journal of Dairy Science 73:1522–1536.Google Scholar
L'Huillier, P. J., Parr, C. R. and Bryant, A. M. 1988. Comparative performance and energy metabolism of Jerseys and Friesians in early-mid lactation. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 48: 231–235.Google Scholar
Livestock Improvement Corporation. 1992/93. Dairy statistics for New Zealand, 1992/93. Google Scholar
Mahoney, C. B., Hansen, L. B., Young, C. W., Marx, G. D. and Renean, J. K. 1986. Health care of Holsteins selected for large or small body size. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 3131–3139.Google Scholar
Mao, I. K. and Burnside, E. B. 1969. Sire by herd environment interaction for milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 52:1055–1063.Google Scholar
Metzger, J. S., Hansen, L. B., Norman, H. D., Wolfe, C. W. and Pedersen, J. 1994. Comparison of United States and Danish strains of Jerseys for yield traits. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 1457–1465.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. 1987. Estimates of variance due to sire X herd interactions and environmental covariances between paternal half sibs for first lactation dairy production. Livestock Production Science 17: 95–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monteiro, L. S. 1972. The control of appetite in lactating cows. Animal Production 14: 263–282.Google Scholar
New Zealand Dairy Board. 1958. Annual report, no. 34, p. 92.Google Scholar
Nieman-Sorenson, A. 1991. Views on various strategies for development in dairy cattle production. In On the eve of the 3rd millennium; the European challenge for animal production, European Association for Animal Production, publication, no. 48.Google Scholar
Oldenbroek, J. K. 1986. The performance of Jersey heifers and heifers of larger breeds on two complete diets with different roughage contents. Livestock Production Science 14: 1–14.Google Scholar
Oldenbroek, J. K. 1988. The performance of Jersey cows and cows of larger dairy breeds on two complete diets with different roughage contents. Livestock Production Science 18: 1–17.Google Scholar
Østergaard, V., Korver, S., Solbu, H., Andersen, B., Oldham, J. and Wiktorsson, H. 1990. Efficiency in the dairy cow. Livestock Production Science 24: 287–304.Google Scholar
Persaud, P., Simm, G., Parkinson, H. and Hill, W. G. 1990. Relationships between sires transmitting ability for production and daughters production, food intake and efficiency in a high yielding herd. Animal Production 51: 245–253.Google Scholar
Persaud, P. Simm, G. and Hill, W. G. 1991. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for yield, food intake and efficiency of dairy cows fed ad libitum. Animal Production 52:435–444.Google Scholar
Peterson, M. L., Hansen, L. B., Young, C. W. and Miller, K. P. 1986. Rates of milk flow and milking times resulting from selection for milk yield. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 556–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, R. 1988. Comparison of Canadian and New Zealand sires in New Zealand for production, weight and conformation traits. Livestock Improvement Corporation, research bulletin, no. 5.Google Scholar
Phillips, D. S. M. 1978. Dairy cattle milking: minimal stimulation. AgLink, Ministry of Agriculture New Zealand, F.P.P. 168.Google Scholar
Richardson, D. O., Owen, J. R., Plowman, R. D. and Miles, J. T. 1971. Importance of sire X ration interactions in production and feed intake traits of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 54:1518–1525.Google Scholar
Schutz, M. M. 1994. Genetic evaluation of somatic cell score for United States dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 2113–2129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seykora, A. J. and McDaniel, B. T. 1983. Heritabilities and correlations of lactation yields and fertility for Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 66:1486–1493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Short, T. H., Bell, B. R., Richardson, D. O., Dowlen, H. H., Moore, E. D. and Owen, J. R. 1990. Correlated responses of health cost to selection for milk yield in Jerseys. Journal of Dairy Science 73: 2547–2554.Google Scholar
Smothers, C. D., Bell, B. R., Richardson, D. O., Hollown, B. F., Moore, E. D. and Owen, J. R. 1986. Correlated response in feed efficiency accompanying selection for milk yield in Jerseys. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 2370–2378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Syrstad, O. 1976. Interaction between genotype X nutrition in dairy production — a review. World Review of Animal Production 12: 33–38.Google Scholar
Wallace, L. R. 1956. The relationship of size yield to efficiency of cows. Ruakura Farmers Conference, pp.177–184.Google Scholar
Wautlet, R. G., Hansen, L. B., Young, C. W., Chester-Jones, H. and Marx, G. D. 1990. Calving disorders of primiparous Holsteins from designed selection studies. Journal of Dairy Science 73: 2555–2562.Google Scholar
Ward, A. H. 1950. The future of artificial insemination in New Zealand. Ruakura Farmers Conference, pp. 224–232.Google Scholar
Whittaker, W. G. 1994. Dairy herd improvement: meeting the information needs of the dairy industry through a totally integrated cooperative. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 1992–1998.Google Scholar
Wickham, B. W., Belsey, M. A., Jackson, R. G. and Rumball, W. 1978. Evidence of genetic improvement of New Zealand dairy cattle. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 6: 101–113.Google Scholar
Yerex, R. P., Young, C. W., Donker, J. D. and Marx, G. D. 1988. Effects of selection for body size on feed efficiency and size of Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 71: 1355–1360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed