J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gomez-Raya, L.
Right arrow Articles by Klemetsdal, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gomez-Raya, L.
Right arrow Articles by Klemetsdal, G.

Journal of Animal Science, Vol 77, Issue 8 2008-2018, Copyright © 1999 by American Society of Animal Science


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Two-stage selection strategies utilizing marker-quantitative trait locus information and individual performance

L. Gomez-Raya and G. Klemetsdal
Department of Animal Science, Agricultural University of Norway, As.

Short- and long-term response to marker-assisted selection in two stages was studied using a stochastic simulation of a closed nucleus herd for beef production. First-stage selection was carried out within families based on information at a fully additive quantitative trait locus (QTL). Second-stage selection strategies were based on 1) individual phenotype, 2) individual phenotype precorrected for QTL, 3) a selection index incorporating phenotype and QTL information, 4) a standard animal model BLUP, and 5) a selection index incorporating marker-QTL information and standard animal model BLUP on records precorrected for QTL. All strategies were efficient in moving the favorable allele at the QTL to fixation, but they differed in the time to reach fixation. Mass selection was less efficient in changing allele frequencies than BLUP. Discounted accumulated response, accounting for the time response was realized and inflation rate, was proposed to rank strategies and to elude the conflict between short- and long-term response in marker-assisted selection. Discounted accumulated response at a time horizon of 20 yr for alternative two-stage selection strategies was compared with conventional BLUP carried out in second stage only. Within-family selection increased discounted accumulated response by more than 11% using Strategy 4 and by up to 12% using Strategy 5 at an inflation rate of 2%. The percentage increase in response was less for highly heritable traits and when the proportion of additive variance explained by the QTL was small. Strategy 5 gave larger response with reduced inbreeding. This strategy also resulted in the lowest cost-benefit ratio, requiring less genotyping per unit of response. Cost-benefit ratio for discounted genotyping and for discounted in vitro production of embryos for traits with low heritability was two to four times that for traits with high heritability. The use of first-stage selection slightly increased the level of inbreeding for both mass (Strategy 1) and BLUP selection (Strategies 4 and 5).


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
L. Gomez-Raya, K. Priest, W. M. Rauw, M. Okomo-Adhiambo, D. Thain, B. Bruce, A. Rink, R. Torell, L. Grellman, R. Narayanan, et al.
The value of DNA paternity identification in beef cattle: Examples from Nevada's free-range ranches
J Anim Sci, January 1, 2008; 86(1): 17 - 24.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
GeneticsHome page
M. Lstiburek, T. J. Mullin, T. F. C. Mackay, D. Huber, and B. Li
Positive Assortative Mating With Family Size as a Function of Predicted Parental Breeding Values
Genetics, November 1, 2005; 171(3): 1311 - 1320.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
GeneticsHome page
L. Gomez-Raya, H. G. Olsen, F. Lingaas, H. Klungland, D. I. Vage, I. Olsaker, S. B. Talle, M. Aasland, and S. Lien
The Use of Genetic Markers to Measure Genomic Response to Selection in Livestock
Genetics, November 1, 2002; 162(3): 1381 - 1388.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by the American Society of Animal Science.