Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37678792›Full record

ArticleJournal of dairy science2023

Developing flexible models for genetic evaluations in smallholder crossbred dairy farms.

R Costilla, J Zeng, M Al Kalaldeh, M Swaminathan, J P Gibson, V Ducrocq, B J Hayes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

R CostillaAgResearch Limited, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton 3214, New Zealand; Centre for Animal Science, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia. Electronic address: roy.costilla@agresearch.co.nz.
J ZengInstitute for Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia.
M Al KalaldehCentre for Genetic Analysis and Applications, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia.
M SwaminathanBAIF Development Research Foundation, Pune 412 202, Maharashtra, India.
J P GibsonCentre for Genetic Analysis and Applications, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia.
V DucrocqUniversite Paris-Saclay, INRAE, AgroParisTech, UMR GABI, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas, France.
B J HayesCentre for Animal Science, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AUUniversity of New England · AUAgroParisTech · FRBAIF Development Research Foundation · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

MilkModels, GeneticAnimalsBayes TheoremCattleFarmsFemaleGenotypeLactationPhenotypeBayesRdeveloping countriesGWASmilk yieldQTL

Identifiers

PMID37678792
PMCPMC10772325
OpenAlexW4386530443

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.