Mary Kate Hollifield 1 D Lourenco 1 S Tsuruta 1 M Bermann 1 J Howard 2 I Misztal 1 ASAS Annual Meeting July 16 th 2021 1 Department of Animal and Dairy Science University of Georgia Athens GA ID: 932264
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Impact of including the cause of missing..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Impact of including the cause of missing records on genetic evaluations for growth in commercial pigs
Mary Kate Hollifield1, D. Lourenco1, S. Tsuruta1, M. Bermann1,J. Howard2, I. Misztal1
ASAS Annual Meeting
July 16
th, 2021
1
Department of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA
2
Smithfield Premium Genetics, Rose Hill, NC
Slide2Mortality and culling detrimental to financial gain
Lowly heritable traits = lengthy genetic progressIndividual identification essential for breeding programsLivability and HCW affected by many complicated traitsIntroduction
Slide3Observe the impact of missing records on growth trait evaluations
Analyze retained ear tag and livability traitsCompare genetic parameters of hot carcass weight and birth weight with and without including cause of missing recordsObjectives
Slide4Data
Smithfield Premium GeneticsPedigree: 1,965,077 Three-way crossbred terminal animals2014 - 2019Materials and Methods
Four traits:
Birth weight
Hot carcass weightRetained ear tagLivability
Slide5Trait
Code
Level
N
%
BW
471360
100.0
HCW
221311
47.0
RT
1
Missing Tag
134523
28.5
2
Retained Tag
336837
71.5
LIV
0
Missing Tag
134523
28.51Died/Culled10451322.22Harvested23232449.3
Slide6Model and Analyses
(M1) Four-trait threshold-linear model
(BW-HCW-RT-LIV)
(M2) Two-trait linear model(BW-HCW)
Materials and Methods
THRGIBBS1f90
50,000 rounds
LR Method
Accuracy, bias, dispersion, Pearson correlations
Slide7Results
BW
HCW
RT
LIV
Model 1
BW
0.11 ± 0.00
0.31 ± 0.03
0.34 ± 0.03
0.56 ± 0.03
HCW
0.07 ± 0.00
0.26 ± 0.04
0.09 ± 0.05
RT
0.02 ± 0.00
0.00 ± 0.06
LIV
0.04 ± 0.00
Model 2
BW
0.11 ± 0.00
0.32 ± 0.03
HCW
0.07 ± 0.00
Slide8Results
Trait
Model
Bias
BW
M1
0.33
0.74
0.00
0.59
M2
0.33
0.75
0.01
0.59
HCW
M1
0.37
0.93
-0.01
0.74
M2
0.37
0.91
0.06
0.74
RT
M1
0.190.650.00
0.56
LIV
M1
0.23
0.78
0.00
0.56
Trait
Model
Bias
BW
M1
0.33
0.74
0.00
0.59
M2
0.33
0.75
0.010.59HCWM10.370.93-0.010.74M20.370.910.060.74RTM10.190.650.000.56LIVM10.230.780.000.56
Slide9No performance differences observed with missing trait information included in the model
Positive genetic correlations between BW and RT and LIVAlternative options:Social interaction modelsLow density genotyping for identificationRT and LIV are not necessary to include in HCW evaluations
Conclusions
Slide10marykate.hollifield@uga.edu