Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T17:36:39.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationship between milk composition and yield of milk, fat and protein in Red Danish cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

K. Christensen
K. Christensen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Genetics, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural College, Copenhagen, Denmark
Get access

Extract

The relationships among five traits in dairy cattle (milk yield, fat yield, protein, fat % and protein %) were examined on the original and on a logarithmic scale. The data comprised the records on 5333 Red Danish cows tested at the Danish Progeny Testing Stations during the years 1960–66. None of the heritabilities or the correlations among the variates were altered appreciably by transformation. For the five traits heritability estimates were 0·56, 0·80, 0·65, 0·64 and 0·56, respectively. Phenotypic and genetic correlations among milk yield, fat yield and protein yield were all very high, about 0·95. The correlations between fat % and protein % were about 0·6. The coefficient of variation of a variate proved to be a good approximation of the standard deviation of the transformed variate even for milk, fat and protein yield with coefficients of variation of 17–18%. It was concluded that little is likely to be gained by using index selection for fat yield and protein yield. However, about 90% of the response obtainable by direct selection for fat or protein yield could be obtained merely by selection for milk yield. A large correlated response for protein yield could be obtained by selecting for fat yield.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , November 1968 , pp. 445 - 450
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1968

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

REFERENCES

Butcher, K. R., Sargent, F. D. and Legates, J. E. 1967. Estimates of genetic parameters for milk constituents and yields. J. Dairy Sci. 50: 185–193.Google Scholar
Hinks, C. J. M. 1968. The use of station and field tests for the improvement of milking performance in dairy cattle. Anim. Prod. 10: 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmeyr, J. 1955. A study of Danish and Swedish progeny testing methods for dairy bulls. K. LantbrksHögskol. Ann. 22: 425–488.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. 1954. Analysis of data from the Danish progeny testing stations. Z. Tierz. ZüchtBiol. 63: 105–126.Google Scholar
Nielsen, E. 1962, 1963, 1964. Afkomsprøver med tyre, XVI, XVII, XVIII. Beretningfra forsøgslaboratoriet, Nos. 329, 335, 342. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Nielsen, E., Hinks, C. J. M. and Neimann-Sørensen, A. 1966. Landøkonomisk Forsøgs-laboratoriums efterårsnwde, p. 418.Google Scholar
Nielsen, E., Nielsen, A. and Vesth, B. 1965, 1966, 1967. Afkomsprøver med tyre XIX, XX, XXI. Beretning fra forsøgslaboratoriet, Nos. 348, 352, 355. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Poutous, M. 1964. Le testage des taureaux sur la production en matière azotée de leur filles résultats préliminaires. (Premèire partie). Ann. Biol. anim. Bioch. Biophys. 4: 273–286.Google Scholar
Searle, R. S. 1966. The value of indirect selection: 1. Mass selection. Biometrics 21: 682–707.Google Scholar
Smith, C. 1967. A note on the improvement of a trait by selecting on its components. Anim. Prod. 9: 127–130.Google Scholar
Venge, O. 1966. Heritabilitet, milieu og formalisme. Ugeskrift for landmœnd, 38: 631–636.Google Scholar