ReviewJournal of animal science2025
Leveraging data from commercial cattle for genetic improvement- an international perspective.
Review in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Big data and artificial intelligence in animal nutrition: a new era of precision feeding.Tropical animal health and production · 2026Review
- Beef Improvement Federation Genetic Prediction Workshop: opportunities and obstacles to enhancing beef cattle evaluation with sequence data.Journal of animal science · 2025Article
- A vision of how low-coverage sequence data should contribute to genetic evaluation in the future.Journal of animal science · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic evaluations are predicated on routine access to large quantities of data on a range of performance traits from individual animals, their genetic relationships, as well as data on factors other than additive genetic merit that influence phenotypic performance. Based on the well-established breeding pyramid, far more commercial animals generally exist relative to seedstock animals. Despite this, performance data from commercial animals is not always used in genetic evaluations. These data are not utilized for many reasons such as 1) no individual animal data actually exists or is recorded in a useful format from commercial animals, 2) no ancestry is recorded, 3) systematic environmental effects are not recorded, 4) infrastructure is not in place to collate such data, and 5) issues relating to data ownership, governance, and use. Given the end customer of elite germplasm is the commercial producer, systems that only consider seedstock data in the genetic evaluations are sub-optimal for several reasons: 1) assumes a genetic correlation of one between performance in seedstock herds and performance in commercial settings, 2) fails to benefit from additional (commercial) data to increase the accuracy of selection, 3) omits data for traits that are profit drivers for commercial enterprises, and 4) misses an opportunity to provide commercial producers with genetic-based management tools. Two contrasting case studies relating to beef genetic evaluations are explored: 1) US where generally only data from seedstock animals are used and many different genetic evaluations and breeding objectives exist for the multitude of breeds, and 2) Ireland which has a national database of all bovines and uses data from both seedstock and commercial producers to generate multi-breed genetic evaluations which are then applied to and disseminated to all bovines in the country both as breeding and management support indexes.
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.