Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34333640›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2021

The impact of direct-maternal genetic correlations on international beef cattle evaluations for Limousin weaning weight.

Renzo Bonifazi, Jérémie Vandenplas, Jan Ten Napel, Roel F Veerkamp, Mario P L Calus

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. On the Identifiability of Genetic Parameters for Growth in Mice With a Massively Deep Pedigree.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Renzo BonifaziAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1794-4708
Jérémie VandenplasAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2554-072X
Jan Ten NapelAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1918-9080
Roel F VeerkampAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5240-6534
Mario P L CalusAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3213-704X
Wageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

Interbeef Working GroupInternational Bull Evaluation ServiceInternational Committee for Animal Recording, ICARIrish Cattle Breeding Federation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In beef cattle maternally influenced traits, estimates of direct-maternal genetic correlations (rdm) are usually reported to be negative. In international evaluations, rdm can differ both within countries (rdm_WC) and between countries (rdm_BC). The rdm_BC are difficult to estimate and are assumed to be zero in the current model for international beef cattle evaluations (Interbeef). Our objective was to investigate re-ranking of international estimated breeding values (IEBVs) in international beef cattle evaluations between models that either used estimated values for rdm or assumed them to be 0. Age-adjusted weaning weights and pedigree data were available for Limousin beef cattle from ten European countries. International EBVs were obtained using a multi-trait animal model with countries modeled as different traits. We compared IEBVs from a model that uses estimated rdm_BC (ranging between -0.14 and +0.14) and rdm_WC (between -0.33 and +0.40) with IEBVs obtained either from the current model that assumes rdm_BC to be 0, or from an alternative model that assumes both rdm_BC and rdm_WC to be 0. Direct and maternal IEBVs were compared across those three scenarios for different groups of animals. The ratio of population accuracies from the linear regression method was used to further investigate the impact of rdm on international evaluations, for both the whole set of animals in the evaluation and the domestic ones. Ignoring rdm_BC, i.e., replacing estimated values with 0, resulted in no (rank correlations > 0.99) or limited (between 0.98 and 0.99) re-ranking for direct and maternal IEBVs, respectively. Both rdm_BC and rdm_WC had less impact on direct IEBVs than on maternal IEBVs. Re-ranking of maternal IEBVs decreased with increasing reliability. Ignoring rdm_BC resulted in no re-ranking for sires with IEBVs that might be exchanged across countries and limited re-ranking for the top 100 sires. Using estimated rdm_BC values instead of considering them to be 0 resulted in null to limited increases in population accuracy. Ignoring both rdm_BC and rdm_WC resulted in considerable re-ranking of animals' IEBVs in all groups of animals evaluated. This study showed the limited impact of the current practice of ignoring rdm_BC in international evaluations for Limousin weaning weight, most likely because the estimated rdm_BC was close to 0. We expect that these conclusions can be extended to other traits that have reported rdm values in the range of rdm_WC values for weaning weight in Limousin.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticAnimalsBody WeightCattleLinear ModelsPhenotypeReproducibility of ResultsWeaningbeef cattledirect-maternal genetic correlationinterbeefinternational estimated breeding valuesinternational genetic evaluationsweaning weight

Identifiers

PMID34333640
PMCPMC8442942
OpenAlexW3191933093

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.