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


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Van Vleck, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by Cassady, J. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Van Vleck, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by Cassady, J. P.
J. Anim. Sci. 2005. 83:68-74
© 2005 American Society of Animal Science


ANIMAL GENETICS

Unexpected estimates of variance components with a true model containing genetic competition effects1

L. D. Van Vleck*,2 and J. P. Cassady{dagger}

* ARS, USDA, Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, Lincoln 68583-0908; and and {dagger} North Carolina State University, Raleigh 27695-7627

2 Correspondence: A218 Animal Sciences (phone: 402-472-6010; fax: 402-472-6362; e-mail: lvanvleck{at}unlnotes.unl.edu).

Simulation of a model containing genetic competition effects was initiated to determine how well REML could untangle variances due to direct and competition genetic effects and pen effects. A two-generation data set was generated with six unrelated males that were each mated to five unrelated females to produce 300 progeny, from which 30 females (one per mating in previous generation) were mated to six unrelated males to produce 300 more progeny. Progeny were randomly assigned, six per pen, to 50 pens per generation. Parameters were Vg, Vc, Cgc, Vp, and Ve, representing direct and competition genetic variance with covariance, and pen and residual variance. Eight statistical models were used to analyze each of 400 replicates of 16 sets of parameters. Both Vg and Ve were fixed at 16.0. Values of Cgc were –2.0, –1.0, 0.1, 1.0, and 2.0. Values of Vc were 1.0 and 4.0, and values of Vp were 0.1, 1.0, and 10.0. With the full model, average estimates resembled true parameters, except that Vp was consistently overestimated when small (0.1 and 1.0), which in turn slightly changed other estimates. The most unexpected result was overestimation of Vp when Vc and Cgc were ignored. Overestimation depended on Vc and the number of competitors in common between records in a pen. Upward bias was somewhat greater when Cgc was positive than when it was negative. For example, with Cgc = 2, Vc = 4, and Vp = 0.1, the mean estimate of Vp was 20.4 when Cgc and Vc were dropped from the model and 15.3 when Cgc = –2.0. When Vp was ignored, estimates of both Cgc and Vc increased in proportion with Vp. Also Vg increased more with greater Vp. Another unexpected result occurred when pen was considered fixed. Empirical sampling standard errors of estimates of Cgc and Vc were decreased generally by factors of 2 to 30. Based on these results, we conclude a high estimate of pen variance may indicate genetic competition effects are important, and ignoring either the pen or competition effects will bias estimates of other components.

Key Words: Genetic Parameters • Pen Effects • Restricted Maximum Likelihood • Simulation




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
W. L. Hsu, R. K. Johnson, and L. D. Van Vleck
Effect of pen mates on growth, backfat depth, and longissimus muscle area of swine
J Anim Sci, March 1, 2010; 88(3): 895 - 902.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
R. J. Tempelman
Invited review: Assessing experimental designs for research conducted on commercial dairies
J Dairy Sci, January 1, 2009; 92(1): 1 - 15.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
C. Y. Chen, S. D. Kachman, R. K. Johnson, S. Newman, and L. D. Van Vleck
Estimation of genetic parameters for average daily gain using models with competition effects
J Anim Sci, October 1, 2008; 86(10): 2525 - 2530.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
GeneticsHome page
R. Bergsma, E. Kanis, E. F. Knol, and P. Bijma
The Contribution of Social Effects to Heritable Variation in Finishing Traits of Domestic Pigs (Sus scrofa)
Genetics, March 1, 2008; 178(3): 1559 - 1570.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Poult. Sci.Home page
E. D. Ellen, J. Visscher, J. A. M. van Arendonk, and P. Bijma
Survival of Laying Hens: Genetic Parameters for Direct and Associative Effects in Three Purebred Layer Lines
Poult. Sci., February 1, 2008; 87(2): 233 - 239.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
L. D. Van Vleck, L. V. Cundiff, and R. M. Koch
Effect of competition on gain in feedlot bulls from Hereford selection lines
J Anim Sci, July 1, 2007; 85(7): 1625 - 1633.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
J. P. Cassady
Evidence of phenotypic relationships among behavioral characteristics of individual pigs and performance
J Anim Sci, January 1, 2007; 85(1): 218 - 224.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J ANIM SCIHome page
J. Arango, I. Misztal, S. Tsuruta, M. Culbertson, and W. Herring
Estimation of variance components including competitive effects of Large White growing gilts
J Anim Sci, June 1, 2005; 83(6): 1241 - 1246.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society of Animal Science.