Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-11T11:40:00.159Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic correlations between yield traits or days open measured in cows and semen production traits measured in bulls

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2017

K. Hagiya ,
T. Hanamure ,
H. Hayakawa ,
H. Abe ,
T. Baba ,
Y. Muranishi  and
Y. Terawaki
K. Hagiya*
Affiliation:
Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Obihiro 080-8555, Japan
T. Hanamure
Affiliation:
Genetics Hokkaido, Chuo, Sapporo 060-0004, Japan
H. Hayakawa
Affiliation:
Genetics Hokkaido, Chuo, Sapporo 060-0004, Japan
H. Abe
Affiliation:
Hokkaido Dairy Milk Recording and Testing Association, Sapporo, 060-0004, Japan
T. Baba
Affiliation:
Holstein Cattle Association of Japan, Hokkaido Branch, Sapporo 001-8555, Japan
Y. Muranishi
Affiliation:
Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Obihiro 080-8555, Japan
Y. Terawaki
Affiliation:
Rakuno Gakuen University, Ebetsu, 069-8501, Japan
*
†E-mail: hagiya@obihiro.ac.jp
Get access

Abstract

We used a bivariate animal model to investigate the genetic correlations between yield traits or days open (DO) as characters measured in cows and semen production traits as characters measured in bulls. Lactation records of 305-day milk, fat, and protein yields, and DO, from 386 809 first-lactation Holstein cows in Hokkaido, Japan, that calved between 2008 and 2014 were used. Semen production records were collected between 2005 and 2014 and included volume per ejaculate (VOL), sperm concentration (CON), number of sperm per ejaculate (NUM), progressive motility index of sperm (MOT), and MOT after freeze-thawing (A-MOT). Number of sperm per ejaculate was log-transformed into a NUM score (NUMS). A total of 30 373 semen production records from 1196 bulls were obtained. The pedigree file used for analysing the records was involving 885 345 animals. Heritability was estimated for VOL (0.42), CON (0.12), NUMS (0.37), MOT (0.08), and A-MOT (0.11). Weak and negative genetic correlations were recorded between yield traits measured in cows and VOL, CON or NUMS measured in bulls. Moderate and negative genetic correlations were obtained between DO and MOT (–0.42) or A-MOT (–0.43). Selection focused on MOT or A-MOT measured in bulls may therefore improve DO measured in cows.

Keywords

dairy cattledays opengenetic correlationmilk yieldsemen production trait
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 12 , Issue 10 , October 2018 , pp. 2027 - 2031
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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

Ali, AKA and Shook, GE 1980. An optimum transformation for somatic cell concentration in milk. Journal of Dairy Science 63, 487–490.Google Scholar
Al-Kanaan, A, Konig, S and Brugemann, K 2015. Effect of heat stress on semen characteristics of Holstein bulls estimated on a continuous phenotypic and genetic scale. Livestock Science 177, 15–24.Google Scholar
Atagi, Y, Onogi, A, Kinukawa, M, Ogino, A, Kurogi, K, Uchiyama, K, Yasumori, T, Adachi, K, Togashi, K and Iwata, H 2017. Genetic analysis of semen production traits of Japanese Black and Holstein bulls: genome-wide markers-based estimation of genetic parameters and environmental effect trends. Journal of Animal Science 95, 1900–1912.Google Scholar
Druet, T, Fritz, S, Sellem, E, Basso, B, Gerard, O, Salas-Cortes, L, Humblot, P, Druart, X and Eggen, A 2009. Estimation of genetic parameters and genome scan for 15 semen characteristics traits of Holstein bulls. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 126, 269–277.Google Scholar
Ducrocq, V and Humblot, P 1995. Genetic characteristics and evolution of semen production of young Normande bulls. Livestock Production Science 41, 1–10.Google Scholar
Gredler, B, Fuerst, C, Fuerst-Waltl, B, Schwarzenbacher, H and Solkner, J 2007. Genetic parameters for semen production traits in Austrian dual-purpose Simmental bulls. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 42, 326–328.Google Scholar
Hagiya, K, Hayasaka, K, Yamasaki, T, Shirai, T, Osawa, T, Terawaki, Y, Nagamine, Y, Masuda, Y and Suzuki, M 2017. Effects of heat stress on production, somatic cell score and conception rate in Holsteins. Animal Science Journal 88, 3–10.Google Scholar
Johnston, DJ, Corbet, NJ, Barwick, SA, Wolcott, ML and Holroyd, RG 2014. Genetic correlations of young bull reproductive traits and heifer puberty traits with female reproductive performance in two tropical beef genotypes in northern Australia. Animal Production Science 54, 74–84.Google Scholar
Karoui, S, Diaz, C, Serrano, M, Cue, R, Celorrio, I and Carabano, JM 2011. Time trends, environmental factors and genetic basis of semen traits collected in Holstein bulls under commercial conditions. Animal Reproduction Science 124, 28–38.Google Scholar
Kawakami, J, Hanamure, T, Hagiya, K, Hayakawa, H, Baba, T and Suzuki, M 2016. Estimates of heritability and repeatability of semen characteristics in Holstein bulls (in Jpn). Nihon Chikusan Gakkaiho 87, 101–106.Google Scholar
Kealey, CG, MacNeil, MD, Tess, MW, Geary, TW and Bellows, RA 2006. Genetic parameter estimates for scrotal circumference and semen characteristics of Line 1 Hereford bulls. Journal of Animal Science 84, 283–290.Google Scholar
Mathevon, M, Buhr, MM and Dekkers, JCM 1998a. Environmental, management, and genetic factors affecting semen production in Holstein bulls. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 3321–3330.Google Scholar
Mathevon, M, Dekkers, JCM and Buhr, MM 1998b. Environmental, management and genetic factors affecting semen production in French Montbeliard bulls. Livestock Production Science 55, 65–77.Google Scholar
Miglior, F, Muir, BL and Van Doormaal, BJ 2005. Selection indices in Holstein cattle of various countries. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 1255–1263.Google Scholar
Mishra, C, Palai, TK, Sarangi, LN, Prusty, BR and Maharana, BR 2013. Candidate gene markers for sperm quality and fertility in bulls. Veterinary World 6, 905–910.Google Scholar
Misztal, I, Tsuruta, S, Strabel, T, Auvray, B, Druet, T and Lee, DH 2002. BLUPF90 and Related Programs (BGF90). Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock Production, CD-ROM Communication no. 28, 07, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
Nishimura, K, Honda, T and Oyama, K 2010. Genetic variability of semen characteristics in Japanese Black bulls. Journal of Animal Genetics 38, 73–76.Google Scholar
Phillipsson, J 2011. Interbull developments, global genetic trends and role in the era of genomics. Interbull Bull 44, i–xiii.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
Suchocki, T and Szyda, J 2015. Genome-wide association study for semen production traits in Holstein-Friesian bulls. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 5774–5780.Google Scholar
Uemoto, Y, Osawa, T and Saburi, J 2017. Effect of genotyped cows in the reference population on the genomic evaluation of Holstein cattle. Animal 11, 382–393.Google Scholar
Yamazaki, T, Hagiya, K, Takeda, H, Yamaguchi, S, Osawa, T and Nagamine, Y 2014. Genetic correlations among female fertility, 305-day milk yield and persistency during the first three lactations of Japanese Holstein cows. Livestock Science 168, 26–31.Google Scholar