ArticleJournal of dairy science2023
Developing flexible models for genetic evaluations in smallholder crossbred dairy farms.
Article in Journal of dairy science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatial modelling improves genomic evaluation in Tanzanian smallholder admixed dairy cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2026Article
- Evaluation of crossbreeding strategies for improved adaptation and productivity in African smallholder cattle farms.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2025Article
- Genetic estimates and genome-wide association studies of antibody response in Tanzanian dairy cattle.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The productivity of smallholder dairy farms is very low in developing countries. Important genetic gains could be realized using genomic selection, but genetic evaluations need to be tailored for lack of pedigree information and very small farm sizes. To accommodate this situation, we propose a flexible Bayesian model for the genetic evaluation of milk yield, which allows us to simultaneously account for nongenetic random effects for farms and varying SNP variance (BayesR model). First, we used simulations based on real genotype data from Indian crossbred dairy cattle to demonstrate that the proposed model can separate the true genetic and nongenetic parameters even for small farm sizes (2 cows on average) although with high standard errors in scenarios with low heritability. The accuracy of genomic genetic evaluation increased until farm size was approximately 5. We then applied the model to real data from 4,655 crossbred cows with 106,109 monthly test day milk records and 689,750 autosomal SNPs. We estimated a heritability of 0.16 (0.04) for milk yield and using cross-validation, a genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) accuracy of 0.45 and bias (regression of phenotype on GEBV) of 1.04 (0.26). Estimated genetic parameters were very similar using BayesR, BayesC, and genomic BLUP approaches. Candidate genes near the top variants, IMMP2L and ARHGEF2, have been previously associated with milk protein composition, mastitis resistance, and milk cholesterol content. The estimated heritability and GEBV accuracy for milk yield are much lower than those from intensive or pasture-based systems in many countries. Further increases in the number of phenotyped and genotyped animals in farms with at least 2 cows (preferably 3-5, to allow for dropout of cows) are needed to improve the estimation of genetic effects in these smallholder dairy farms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.