Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T00:51:05.144Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetics and genomics of reproductive performance in dairy and beef cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2014

D. P. Berry ,
E. Wall  and
J. E. Pryce
D. P. Berry*
Affiliation:
Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Co. Cork, Ireland
E. Wall
Affiliation:
Animal and Veterinary Sciences, SRUC, Kings Buildings, West Mains Road, EH9 3JG, UK
J. E. Pryce
Affiliation:
Department of Environment and Primary Industries & Dairy Futures CRC, La Trobe University, Agribio, 5 Ring Road, Bundoora 3083, Australia
*
†E-mail: donagh.berry@teagasc.ie
Get access

Abstract

Excellent reproductive performance in both males and females is fundamental to profitable dairy and beef production systems. In this review we undertook a meta-analysis of genetic parameters for female reproductive performance across 55 dairy studies or populations and 12 beef studies or populations as well as across 28 different studies or populations for male reproductive performance. A plethora of reproductive phenotypes exist in dairy and beef cattle and a meta-analysis of the literature suggests that most of the female reproductive traits in dairy and beef cattle tend to be lowly heritable (0.02 to 0.04). Reproductive-related phenotypes in male animals (e.g. semen quality) tend to be more heritable than female reproductive phenotypes with mean heritability estimates of between 0.05 and 0.22 for semen-related traits with the exception of scrotal circumference (0.42) and field non-return rate (0.001). The low heritability of reproductive traits, in females in particular, does not however imply that genetic selection cannot alter phenotypic performance as evidenced by the decline until recently in dairy cow reproductive performance attributable in part to aggressive selection for increased milk production. Moreover, the antagonistic genetic correlations among reproductive traits and both milk (dairy cattle) and meat (beef cattle) yield is not unity thereby implying that simultaneous genetic selection for both increased (milk and meat) yield and reproductive performance is indeed possible. The required emphasis on reproductive traits within a breeding goal to halt deterioration will vary based on the underlying assumptions and is discussed using examples for Ireland, the United Kingdom and Australia as well as quantifying the impact on genetic gain for milk production. Advancements in genomic technologies can aid in increasing the accuracy of selection for especially reproductive traits and thus genetic gain. Elucidation of the underlying genomic mechanisms for reproduction could also aid in resolving genetic antagonisms. Past breeding programmes have contributed to the deterioration in reproductive performance of dairy and beef cattle. The tools now exist, however, to reverse the genetic trends in reproductive performance underlying the observed phenotypic trends.

Keywords

fertilitybreedingcowDNA
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Supplement s1: New Science ‐ New Practices International Cow Fertility Conference 18‐21 May 2014, Westport, Ireland , May 2014 , pp. 105 - 121
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Berry, DP and Kearney, JF 2011. Imputation of genotypes from low-to high-density genotyping platforms and implications for genomic selection. Animal 5, 1162–1169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP and Evans, RD 2014. Genetics of reproductive performance in seasonal calving beef cows and its association with performance traits. Journal of Animal Science 92, 1412–1422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, DP, Evans, RD and McParland, S 2011. Evaluation of bull fertility in dairy and beef cattle using cow field data. Theriogenology 75, 172–181.Google Scholar
Berry, DP, Kearney, JF, Twomey, K and Evans, RD 2013. Genetics of reproductive performance in seasonal calving dairy cattle production systems. Irish Journal of Agriculture and Food Research 52, 1–16.Google Scholar
Berry, DP, Buckley, F, Dillon, PG, Evans, RD and Veerkamp, RF 2004. Genetic relationships among linear type traits, milk yield, body weight, fertility and somatic cell count in primiparous dairy cows. Irish Journal of Agricultural & Food Research 43, 161–176.Google Scholar
Berry, DP, Buckley, F, Dillon, P, Evans, RD, Rath, M and Veerkamp, RF 2003. Genetic relationships among body condition score, body weight, milk yield and fertility in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2193–2204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP, Bastiaansen, JWM, Veerkamp, RF, Wijga, S, Wall, E, Berglund, B and Calus, MPL 2012. Genome-wide associations for fertility traits in Holstein-Friesian dairy cows using data from experimental research herds in four European countries. Animal 6, 1206–1215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP, Shalloo, L, Cromie, AR, Veerkamp, RF, Dillon, P, Amer, PR, Kearney, JF, Evans, RD and Wickham, B 2007. ‘The Economic Breeding Index: A Generation on’. Technical report to the Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, pp. 1–50. Retrieved 19 June 2009, from http://www.icbf.com/publications/files/economic_breeding_index.pdf Google Scholar
Calus, MPL, Berry, DP, Banos, G, de Haas, Y and Veerkamp, RF 2013. Genomic selection: the option for new robustness traits? Advances in Animal Biosciences 4, 618–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carthy, T, Fitzgerald, A, Berry, DP, McParland, S, Williams, EJ, Butler, ST, Cromie, AR and Ryan, D 2014. Risk factors associated with detailed reproductive phenotypes in dairy and beef cows. Animal 8, 695–703.Google Scholar
Clay, JS and McDaniel, BT 2001. Computing mating bull fertility from DHI nonreturn data. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 1238–1245.Google Scholar
Cole, JB, VanRaden, PM, O'Connell, JR, Van Tassell, CP, Sonstegard, TS, Schnabel, RD, Taylor, JF and Wiggans, GR 2009. Distribution and location of genetic effects for dairy traits. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 2931–2946.Google Scholar
DairyCo 2013. PLI elements. Accessed November 2013, from http://www.dairyco.org.uk/technical-information/breeding-genetics/pli-elements/ Google Scholar
Dechow, CD, Rogers, GW, Klei, L, Lawlor, TJ and VanRaden, PM 2004. Body condition scores and dairy form evaluations as indicators of days open in US Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 3534–3541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Echternkamp, SE, Huttington, GB, Tyrell, HF and Reynolds, PJ 1990. Twinning in cattle: II. Genetic and environmental effects on ovulation rate in puberal heifers and postpartum cows and the effects of ovulation rate on embryonic survival. Journal of Animal Science 68, 1877–1888.Google Scholar
Eggen, A 2012. The development and application of genomic selection as a new breeding paradigm. Animal Frontiers 2, 10–15.Google Scholar
Evans, ACO, Forde, N, O’Gorman, GM, Zielak, AE, Lonergan, P and Fair, T 2008. Use of microarray technology to profile gene expression patterns important for reproduction in cattle. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 43, 359–367.Google Scholar
Fahrenkrug, SC, Blake, A, Carlson, DF, Doran, T, Van Eenennaam, A, Faber, D, Galli, C, Gao, Q, Hackett, PB, Li, N, Maga, EA, Muir, WM, Murray, JD, Shi, D, Stotish, R, Sullivan, E, Taylor, JF, Walton, M, Wheeler, M, Whitelaw, B and Glenn, BP 2010. Precision genetics for complex objectives in animal agriculture. Journal of Animal Science 88, 2530–2539.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, AM, Berry, DP, Carthy, T, Cromie, AR and Ryan, DP 2014. Risk factors associated with multiple ovulation and twin birth rate in Irish dairy and beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 92, 966–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricke, PM 2002. Scanning the future – ultrasonography as a reproductive management tool for dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 1918–1926.Google Scholar
Fritz, S, Capitan, A, Djari, A, Rodriguez, SC, Barbat, A, Baur, A, Grohs, C, Weiss, B, Boussaha, M, Esquerré, D, Klopp, C, Dominique Rocha, D and Boichard, D 2013. Detection of haplotypes associated with prenatal death in dairy cattle and identification of deleterious mutations in GART, SHBG and SLC37A2. PLoS One 8, e65550. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065550.Google Scholar
Gauly, M, Mathiak, H, Hoffmann, K, Kraus, M and Erhardt, G 2001. Estimating genetic variability in temperamental traits in German Angus and Simmental cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74, 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosshans, T, Xu, ZZ, Burton, LJ, Johnson, DL and Macmillan, KL 1997. Performance and genetic parameters for fertility of seasonal dairy cows in New Zealand. Livestock Production Science 51, 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, JP, Álvarez, I, Fernández, I, Royo, LJ, Díez, J and Goyache, F 2002. Genetic relationships between calving date, calving interval, age at first calving and type traits in beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 78, 215–222.Google Scholar
Hawken, RJ, Zhang, YD, Fortes, MR, Collis, E, Barris, WC, Corbet, NJ, Williams, PJ, Fordyce, G, Holroyd, RG, Walkley, JR, Barendse, W, Johnston, DJ, Prayaga, KC, Tier, B, Reverter, A and Lehnert, SA 2012. Genome-wide association studies of female reproduction in tropically adapted beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 90, 1398–1410.Google Scholar
Hayes, BJ and Goddard, ME 2010. Genome-wide association and genomic selection in animal breeding. Genome 53, 876–883.Google Scholar
Hayes, BJ, Bowman, PJ, Chamberlain, AJ and Goddard, ME 2009. Invited review: genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 433–443.Google Scholar
Hazel, LN 1943. The genetic basis for constructing selection indexes. Genetics 28, 476–490.Google Scholar
Hickey, JM 2013. Sequencing millions of animals for genomic selection 2.0. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 130, 331–332.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, D and Thaller, G 2011. Pedigree analysis and inbreeding effects on calving traits in large dairy herds in Germany. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 4726–4733.Google Scholar
Hoeschele, I 1991. Additive and non-additive genetic variance in female fertility of Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 1743–1752.Google Scholar
Höglund, JK, Buitenhuis, AJ, Guldbrandtsen, B, Su, G, Thomsen, B and Lund, MS 2009. Overlapping chromosomal regions for fertility traits and production traits in the Danish Holstein population. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 5712–5719.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooijer, GA, Lubbers, RB, Ducro, BJ, van Arendonk, JA, Kaal-Lansbergen, LM and van der Lende, T 2001. Genetic parameters for cystic ovarian disease in Dutch black and white dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 286–291.Google Scholar
Huang, Y, Maltecca, C, Cassady, JP, Alexander, LJ, Snelling, WM and MacNeil, MD 2012. Effects of reduced panel, reference origin, and genetic relationship on imputation of genotypes in Hereford cattle. Journal of Animal Science 90, 4203–4208.Google Scholar
Hudson, GFS and Van Vleck, LD 1984. Effects of inbreeding on milk and fat production, stayability and calving interval of registered Ayrshire cattle in the Northeastern United States. Journal of Dairy Science 67, 171–179.Google Scholar
Jamrozik, J, Fatehi, J, Kistemaker, GJ and Schaeffer, LR 2005. Estimates of genetic parameters for Canadian Holstein female reproduction traits. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 2199–2208.Google Scholar
Johnston, DJ and Bunter, KL 1996. Days to calving in Angus cattle: genetic and environmental effects and covariances with other traits. Livestock Production Science 45, 13–22.Google Scholar
Kasimanickam, R, Duffield, TF, Foster, RA, Gartley, CJ, Leslie, KE, Walton, JS and Johnson, WH 2004. Endometrial cytology and ultrasonography for the detection of subclinical endometritis in postpartum dairy cows. Theriogenology 62, 9–23.Google Scholar
Kearney, JF, Wall, E, Villanueva, B and Coffey, MP 2004. Inbreeding trends and application of optimized selection in the UK Holstein population. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 3503–3509.Google Scholar
Kinghorn, BP 1998. Managing genetic change under operational and cost constraints. 36th national congress of the South African Association of Animal Science. University of Stellenbosch, 5 to 8 April 1998, pp. 9–16.Google Scholar
Koeck, A, Miglior, F, Kelton, DF and Schenkel, FS 2012. Health recording in Canadian Holsteins: data and genetic parameters. Journal of Dairy Science 9, 4099–4108.Google Scholar
Koots, KR, Gibson, JP, Smith, C and Wilton, JW 1994a. Analyses of published genetic parameter estimates for beef production traits. 1. Heritability. Animal Breeding Abstracts 62, 309–338.Google Scholar
Koots, KR, Gibson, JP and Wilton, JW 1994b. Analyses of published genetic parameter estimates for beef production traits. 2. Phenotypic and genetic correlations. Animal Breeding Abstracts 62, 825–853.Google Scholar
Kuhn, MT and Hutchison, JL 2008. Prediction of dairy bull fertility from field data: use of multiple services and identification and utilization of factors affecting bull fertility. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 2481–2492.Google Scholar
Kuhn, MT, Boettcher, PJ and Freeman, AE 1994. Potential biases in predicted transmitting abilities of females from preferential treatment. Journal of Dairy Science 77, 2428–2437.Google Scholar
Lin, HK, Oltenacu, PA, Van Vleck, LD, Erb, HN and Smith, RD 1989. Heritabilities of and genetic correlations among six health problems in Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 180–186.Google Scholar
Løvendahl, P and Chagunda, MG 2009. Genetic variation in estrus activity traits. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 4683–4688.Google Scholar
Mackinnon, MJ, Taylor, JF and Hetzel, DJ 1990. Genetic variation and covariation in beef cow and bull fertility. Journal of Animal Science 68, 1208–1214.Google Scholar
Martínez-Velázquez, G, Gregory, KE, Bennett, GL and Van Vleck, LD 2003. Genetic relationships between scrotal circumference and female reproductive traits. Journal of Animal Science 81, 395–401.Google Scholar
McParland, S, Kearney, JF, Rath, M and Berry, DP 2007a. Inbreeding trends and pedigree analysis of Irish dairy and beef cattle populations. Journal of Animal Science 85, 322–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McParland, S, Kearney, JF, Rath, M and Berry, DP 2007b. Inbreeding effects on milk production, calving performance, fertility, and conformation in Irish Holstein-Friesians. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 4411–4419.Google Scholar
McParland, S, Banos, G, Wall, E, Coffey, MP, Soyeurt, H, Veerkamp, RF and Berry, DP 2011. The use of mid-infrared spectrometry to predict body energy status of Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 3651–3661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meuwissen, THE, Hayes, BJ and Goddard, ME 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157, 1819–1829.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miglior, F, Muir, BL and Van Doormaal, BJ 2005. Selection indices in Holstein cattle of various countries. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1255–1263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, DG, Wang, PR, Petek, LM, Hirata, RK, Sands, MS and Russell, DW 2006. Gene targeting in vivo by adenoassociated virus vectors. Nature Biotechnology 24, 1022–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minick Bormann, J and Wilson, DE 2010. Calving day and age at first calving in Angus heifers. Journal of Animal Science 88, 1947–1956.Google Scholar
Nielsen, HM, Christensen, LG and Groen, AF 2005. Derivation of sustainable breeding goals for dairy cattle using selection index theory. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1882–1890.Google Scholar
Parkinson, TJ 2004. Evaluation of fertility and infertility in natural service bulls. The Veterinary Journal 168, 215–219.Google Scholar
Pasaniuc, B, Rohland, N, McLaren, PJ, Garimella, K, Zaitlen, N, Li, H, Gupta, N, Neale, B, Daly, M, Sklar, P, Sullivan, PF, Bergen, S, Moran, JL, Hultman, CM, Lichtenstein, P, Magnusson, P, Purcell, SM, Haas, DW, Liang, L, Sunyaev, S, Patterson, N, de Bakker, PIW, Reich, D and Price, AL 2012. Extremely low-coverage sequencing and imputation increases power for genome-wide association studies. Nature Genetics 44, 631–635.Google Scholar
Phocas, F 2009. Genetic analysis of breeding traits in a Charolais cattle population segregating an inactive myostatin allele. Journal of Animal Science 87, 1865–1871.Google Scholar
Phocas, F and Sapa, J 2004. Genetic parameters for growth, reproductive performance, calving ease and suckling performance in beef cattle heifers. Animal Science 79, 41–48.Google Scholar
Pollott, GE and Coffey, MP 2008. The effect of genetic merit and production system on dairy cow fertility, measured using progesterone profiles and on-farm recording. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 3649–3660.Google Scholar
Pösö, J and Mänytsaari, EA 1996. Genetic relationships between reproductive disorders, operational days open and milk yield. Livestock Production Science 46, 41–48.Google Scholar
Pritchard, T, Coffey, M, Mrode, R and Wall, E 2013. Genetic parameters for production, health, fertility and longevity traits in dairy cows. Animal 7, 34–46.Google Scholar
Pryce, JE, Coffey, MP and Brotherstone, S 2000. The genetic relationship between calving interval, body conditions core and linear type and management traits in registered Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 2664–2671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pryce, JE, Bolormaa, S, Chamberlain, AJ, Bowman, PJ, Savin, K, Goddard, ME, Hayes, BJ 2010. A validated genome wide association study in two dairy cattle breeds for variable length haplotypes. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3331–3345.Google Scholar
Pryce, JE, Hayes, BJ, Goddard, ME 2012. Novel strategies to minimize progeny inbreeding while maximizing genetic gain using genomic information. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 377–388.Google Scholar
Pryce, JE, Veerkamp, RF, Thompson, R, Hill, WG and Simm, G 1997. Genetic aspects of common health disorders and measures of fertility in Holstein Friesian dairy cattle. Animal Science 65, 353–360.Google Scholar
Rendel, J and Robertson, A 1950. Estimation of genetic gain in milk yield by selection in a closed herd of dairy cattle. Journal of Genetics 50, 1–8.Google Scholar
Roughsedge, T, Amer, PR, Thompson, R and Simm, G 2005. Development of a maternal breeding goal and tools to select for this goal in UK beef production. Animal Science 81, 221–232.Google Scholar
Royal, MD, Pryce, JE, Woolliams, JA and Flint, APF 2002. The genetic relationship between commencement of luteal activity and calving interval, body condition score, production, and linear type traits in Holstein-Friesian dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 3071–3080.Google Scholar
Sewalem, A, Kistemaker, GJ and Miglior, F 2010. Relationship between female fertility and production traits in Canadian Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4427–4434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheldon, MI, Williams, EJ, Miller, ANA, Nash, DM and Herath, S 2008. Uterine diseases in cattle after parturition. Veterinary Journal 176, 115–121.Google Scholar
Spelman, R, Hayes, BJ and Berry, DP 2013. Use of molecular technologies for the advancement of animal breeding: genomic selection in dairy cattle populations in Australia, Ireland and New Zealand. Animal Production Science 53, 869–875.Google Scholar
Sun, C, VanRaden, PM, O’Connell, JR, Weigel, KA and Gianola, D 2013. Mating programs including genomic relationships and dominance effects. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 8014–8023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urioste, JI, Misztal, I and Bertrand, JK 2007. Fertility traits in spring-calving Aberdeen Angus cattle. 1. Model development and genetic parameters. Journal of Animal Science 85, 2854–2860.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Marle-Koster, E, Visser, C and Berry, DP 2013. A review of genomic selection – implications for the South African beef and dairy cattle industries. South African Journal of Animal Science 43, 1–17.Google Scholar
VanRaden, PM, Olson, KM, Null, DJ and Hutchison, JL 2011. Harmful recessive effects on fertility detected by absence of homozygous haplotypes. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 6153–6161.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, RF, Koenen, EPC and De Jong, G 2001. Genetic correlations among body condition score, yield, and fertility in first-parity cows estimated by random regression models. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 2327–2335.Google Scholar
Visscher, PM, Brown, MA, McCarthy, MI and Yang, J 2012. Five years of GWAS discovery. The American Journal of Human Genetics 90, 7–24.Google Scholar
Wall, E, Simm, G and Moran, D 2010. Developing breeding schemes to assist mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Animal 4, 366–376.Google Scholar
Wall, E, Brotherstone, S, Woolliams, JA, Banos, G and Coffey, MP 2003. Genetic evaluation of fertility using direct and correlated traits. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 4093–4102.Google Scholar
Wall, E, Brotherstone, S, Kearney, JF, Woolliams, JA and Coffey, MP 2005. Impact of nonadditive genetic effects in the estimation of breeding values for fertility and correlated traits. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 376–385.Google Scholar
Waters, S, McCabe, M, Howard, D, Giblin, L, Magee, DA, MacHugh, DE and Berry, DP 2011. Associations between newly discovered polymorphisms in the Bos taurus growth hormone receptor gene and performance traits in Holstein-Friesian dairy cattle. Animal Genetics 42, 39–49.Google Scholar
Whitelaw, CB and Sang, HM 2005. Disease-resistant genetically modified animals. Reviews in Science and Technology 24, 275–283.Google Scholar
Wiggans, GR, VanRaden, PM and Zuurbier, J 1995. Calculation and use of inbreeding coefficients for genetic evaluation of United States dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 78, 1584–1590.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Table S1

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 32.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Table S2

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 21.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Table S3

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 21.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Table S4

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 23.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Table S5

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 26.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material S1

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 16.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material S2

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 14.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material S3

Download Berry Supplementary Material(File)
File 17.7 KB