Genetic Advancement

Slide 8: Slide 8
Slide 5: Slide 5
Style_Bullvine: Style_Bullvine
Slide 7: Slide 7

Archive for Genetic Advancement

Monthly Genetic Evaluations to Boost Top-Rated Canadian Dairy Cow Rankings in 2025

Friday, July 12th, 2024

Uncover the potential of Lactanet’s 2025 monthly genetic evaluations to elevate your Canadian dairy cows to premier status. Are your herds positioned to gain from this groundbreaking update? Learn more today.

A pillar of the dairy sector, genetic assessments are essential for herd management, breeding choices, and production. These tests concentrate on important factors like milk output, health, and fertility, thus empowering breeders and farmers to propel operational effectiveness and genetic advancement. Early 2025 will see Lactanet, Canada’s national dairy statistics and genetic improvement agency, moving to monthly official assessments for Canadian cows. This shift is significant for herds where milk samples are gathered unsupervised by the herd owner as it might improve more dairy cows to a top-rated level in genetic rankings. The change fits business trends toward automation, improved data-collecting techniques, and expands the genetic basis accessible to breeders.

Driving Genetic Progress: How Lactanet Canada Shapes the Future of Dairy Herds

Crucially, lactate is the pillar of genetic development in Canada. The company provides complete dairy herd management solutions comprising milk records, genetic assessments, and advising services to boost dairy output and genetic enhancement.

Using solid data collecting and thorough analysis, Lactanet stimulates developments that support the national dairy industry’s sustainability and output. Three times a year, in April, August, and December, genetic assessments and bull proofs guarantee great precision and dependability. These tests provide essential benchmarks, including production characteristics, Lifetime Production Index (LPI), and Pro$, thus helping breeders choose the most genetically outstanding animals.

The way Lactanet combined genomic data emphasizes its dedication to genetic improvement. Lactanet accurately assesses the genetic potential of dairy cattle by using sophisticated genotyping, enabling breeders to make educated choices promoting long-term genetic improvement.

Lactanet guarantees the genetic quality of Canadian dairy cattle by matching modern genetic research with pragmatic on-farm data collecting, therefore advancing the sector.

Unveiling Hidden Potentials: Addressing the Genetic Evaluation Gaps in Owner-Sampled Herds

Even with improvements in genetic assessments, the existing method offers challenges—especially for owner-sampled herds. These cows are deprived of gaining places on top-ranking lists like the Lifetime Production Index or Pro$ depending on Parent Average (PA) values instead of exact genetic parameters from supervised testing. These cows typically stay underestimated in formal genetic evaluations without controlled testing data.

The triannual updates postpone the distribution of vital genetic information and further limit the acknowledgment of gene progress within owner-sampled herds. This lag narrows the breeding base, affecting individual breeders and limiting general genetic progress.

The introduction of automated milking systems with built-in sample features emphasizes the increasing discrepancy between contemporary herd management techniques and conventional genetic assessment approaches. In the present configuration, these systems generate large amounts of data that only partially support genetic assessments, developing a discrepancy between actual and evaluated genetic value.

To solve these problems and guarantee that every cow has fair access to top-ranking lists independent of milk testing control, the suggested change to monthly official assessments aims to This modification seeks to drive more successful breeding strategies by offering a more comprehensive and accurate picture of genetic quality in Canadian dairy herds.

Proposed Monthly Genetic Evaluations: A Game Changer for Owner-Sampled Dairy Herds

The suggested adjustments will greatly help owner-sampled herds, including switching to a monthly genetic evaluation scheme. The first Tuesday of every month will be used to update genetic assessments for cows with fresh test results, including unsupervised samples. Official updates for proven sires will come three times a year; owner-sampled herds will frequently have their Parent Average (PA) values updated. This shift increases the genetic pool accessible to breeders by allowing these herds to have maybe cows included in top-ranking genetic lists.

Through monthly updates, Lactanet recognizes the growth in automated milking systems, which gather production data and conduct thorough sampling. This renders either supervised or unsupervised categorization less critical. The obtained data still shows excellent accuracy. Hence, genomics guarantees solid genetic assessments. This change toward regular and comprehensive updates seeks to optimize genetic advancement and enhance the genetic health of dairy cows throughout Canada.

Lactanet’s genetic assessment procedure revolves mainly around integrating genomics, the fundamental component of all genetic ranking systems used in Canada. The company uses a diverse strategy to guarantee the quality and completeness of the published genetic data. Newly collected data from bulls and females undergoing controlled testing is continuously included in the current dataset, updating the “unofficial” genetic assessments. Participating artificial insemination (AI) businesses and farmers using modern herd management systems like Compass and DairyComp may obtain these unofficial assessments.

Implications for Breeders: Expanding the Genetic Horizon with Monthly Evaluations

This change has significant ramifications for breeders. Monthly certified genetic evaluations will increase the genetic data accessible to breeders, enabling assessments based on actual performance rather than Parent Average values. This will increase the genetic pool from which sires and dams could be chosen. Frequent updates will ensure breeders receive the most recent genetic information, guiding their breeding choices. This precision will enable the identification of previously missed outstanding cows. More cows will land top-rated in genetic rankings.

Including information from automated milking systems and other cutting-edge technology will also help to guarantee ratings reflect actual performance. This will enable breeders to propel genetic advancement efficiently, improving dairy herd sustainability, health, and production throughout Canada.

Precision and Reliability: Lactanet’s Multifaceted Genetic Evaluation Process

Using a thorough internal procedure, Lactanet guarantees accuracy and dependability in genetic assessments. This generates unofficial and formal genetic evaluations by combining data from known sires with supervised testing females. Shared via Compass and DairyComp, unofficial assessments provide vital information for temporary herd sire decisions.

Underlying all genetic rankings, Lactanet’s work is based on the integration of genomes. Genomic testing lowers the uncertainty related to conventional techniques by improving assessments’ accuracy and prediction ability.

Considered equally accurate are both controlled and unsupervised milk sample data. The emergence of automated technologies has improved sample integrity and milk production monitoring. Lactanet’s data analytics technologies tightly evaluate these inputs and match them with genetic data to provide high-precision assessments.

Combining conventional data collection, cutting-edge genomics, and strict validation techniques, Lactanet’s genetic assessment system is a diverse strategy that improves assessment accuracy. It increases the genetic basis accessible to breeders, promoting the ongoing development of Canadian dairy herds.

Technological Advancements: The Role of Automated Milking Systems in Modern Dairy Farming

Using automated milking systems signifies a significant change in dairy production, improving output and efficiency. These sophisticated technologies have reduced the need for supervised milk testing by including exact sampling and production monitoring features. Automated milking guarantees reliable data collecting necessary for genetic studies and fits with Lactanet’s shift to unsupervised testing, simplifying the procedure. This change enables significant genetic advancement and improves the quality of Canadian dairy herds by allowing cows to be included more broadly in genetic rankings.

Genomics and Unsupervised Testing: A New Era of Equitable Genetic Evaluations

Brian Van Doormaal highlighted the significance of these changes, noting, “For genetic evaluation, top lists usually involve genotyped females, so there’s little need to distinguish between supervised and unsupervised testing. The data accuracy is equivalent, and genomics ensures high genetic information accuracy.”

Mapping the Road Ahead: Key Milestones for Implementing Lactanet’s New Genetic Evaluation System

As Lactanet gears up for its new monthly evaluation system, several pivotal milestones guide its implementation:

Early 2024: Finalize criteria for cow eligibility through stakeholder consultations and in-depth analysis.
Mid to Late 2024: Conduct pilot runs and gather feedback to refine the evaluation process.
January 2025: Begin initial rollout, integrating the new system with existing triannual updates.
May 2025: Achieve full implementation, ensuring monthly updates for all owner-sampled herds.

This carefully structured timeline guarantees thorough preparation and testing, allowing Lactanet to maintain its commitment to accuracy and reliability.

The Bottom Line

Changing from Lactanet to monthly genetic tests might revolutionize the Canadian dairy sector. It levels the playing field for owner-sampled herds so they may reach high genetic rankings alongside monitored herds, hence increasing the genetic pool available for breeders. This action also fits the growing usage of automated milking systems, which combine cutting-edge dairy farming technology. Dairy cow rankings will become more dynamic and accurate, defining new national genetic advancement and herd development criteria.

Key Takeaways:

Monthly official evaluations will provide more timely and comprehensive genetic data for Canadian cows.
Owner-sampled herds, previously limited to Parent Average values, will now have their genetic evaluations updated monthly.
This change is expected to expand the genetic base available to breeders, allowing more cows to achieve top rankings.
Proven sires’ evaluations will continue to be updated three times annually, maintaining the reliability of genetic data.
The transition aligns with the rising trend of automated milking systems, which offer unsupervised sampling and monitoring capabilities.
Genomics remain fundamental to genetic rankings, ensuring accuracy across both supervised and unsupervised testing environments.
Lactanet is yet to finalize criteria for eligibility, with implementation set for early or mid-2025.

Summary:

Lactanet Canada, Canada’s national dairy statistics and genetic improvement agency, is set to transition to monthly official assessments for Canadian cows in early 2025. This change is particularly significant for herds where milk samples are collected unsupervised by the herd owner, as it could improve more dairy cows to a top-rated level in genetic rankings. Lactanet provides complete dairy herd management solutions, including milk records, genetic assessments, and advisory services to boost dairy output and genetic enhancement. The proposed change aims to drive more successful breeding strategies by offering a more comprehensive and accurate picture of genetic quality in Canadian dairy herds. The company’s genetic assessment procedure focuses on integrating genomics, the fundamental component of all genetic ranking systems used in Canada. Monthly certified genetic evaluations will increase the genetic data accessible to breeders, enabling assessments based on actual performance rather than Parent Average values. Frequent updates will ensure breeders receive the most recent genetic information, guiding their breeding choices.

Learn more:

Categories : Management

Sire vs. Dam – Which has a Greater Impact on Your Herd’s Genetic Improvement?

· Comments (2)

Monday, June 16th, 2014

Too many people say that dairy breeding is an art. If they manage their herds this way, they will be unable to compete in an industry that grows with science. Art places value on the ‘family’ and sees both parents contributing equally shared value to their offspring. In practicing the science of dairy cattle breeding parents are not equal when it comes to which one is the most important when deciding upon a herd’s genetic improvement plan (Read more: What’s the plan? And Flukes and Pukes – What Happens When You Don’t Have a Plan, and Pick The Right Bull – Your Future Depends on The Decisions You Make Today!).

3 Factors Determine Genetic Advancement

On a simplified basis, the rate of genetic advancement in a dairy herd is primarily a function of three factors: 1) the superiority of parents; 2) the accuracy of the parent’s genetic indexes and 3) the generation interval expressed as the time between the birth of the parent to the birth of the calf. Dairy cattle breeders have, in the past, placed a priority on intense selection, but today with genomic information generation interval is necessary.

Four Pathways for Improvement

In a population of dairy cattle there are four groups, commonly called transmission pathways that are considered when determining the overall population rate of improvement. These pathways are: 1) the Sires of Bulls (SB); 2) the Sires of Cows (SC); the Dams of Bulls (DB); and the Dams of Cows (DC). Breeders do not have equally accurate information on each pathway and definitely do not apply equal selection intensity for each pathway.

Which Breeding Scheme is the Best?

The following table outlines the importance of the different pathways for three improvement schemes when animals are ranked and selected using total merit indexes like TPI, NM$ and LPI.

Comparison of Genetic Improvement Schemes

Pathway	Selection %	Accuracy	Generation Interval	Relative Emphasis
1. Traditional Progeny Testing Program
Sires of Bulls (SB)	5	0.99	7	44%*
Sires of Cows (SC)	20	0.75	6	22%
Dams of Bulls (DB)	2	0.6	5	31%
Dams of Cows (DC)	85	0.5	4.25	3%
Relative Total Merit Genetic Gain per Year = 100%
2. Genomic Testing Program
Sires of Bulls (SB)	5	0.75	1.75	34%
Sires of Cows (SC)	20	0.75	1.75	23%
Dams of Bulls (DB)	2	0.75	2	40%*
Dams of Cows (DC)	85	0.5	4.25	3%
Relative Total Merit Genetic Gain per Year = 185% to 200%
3. Genomic Testing Program with IVF
Sires of Bulls (SB)	5	0.75	1.75	30%
Sires of Cows (SC)	10	0.75	1.75	20%
Dams of Bulls (DB)	2	0.75	2	36%*
Dams of Cows (DC)	10	0.62	2	14%
Relative Total Merit Merit Genetic Gain per Year = 225% to 250%

* Pathway of most importance The Bullvine appreciates the assistance of Dr. Larry Schaeffer, University of Guelph, in providing information for the above table. Further details can be found in Dr. Schaeffer’s 2006 paper “Strategy for applying genomic-wide selection in dairy cattle,” Volume 123 of Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics.

Progeny Testing has Served Breeders Well

Breeders have been successful when they used the results of the traditional A.I. progeny testing programs. That is when only elite sires are used to produce bulls (SB) for progeny testing, each year newly proven sires are used to produce the heifer calves (SC), Dams of Bulls (DB) are elite indexing milking females and the bottom 10-15% of the cows in the herd are not used to produce replacement heifers. (Read more: Why you should get rid of the bottom 10% and 8 Ways DNA PROFILING Your Whole Herd Will Improve Your Breeding Program) most important pathway, by quite a distance, is the Sires of Bulls (SB) at 44%. Combined the sire pathways (SB & SC) account for 66% of the total genetic progress. That is opposite to what many breeders say ‘Sires are not as important as cow families. The cow family, in a herd, dominates.’

Genomics gives 185 – 200%

Over the past five years, breeders have become familiar with the program whereby the genomic indexes on young animals are used for animal selection. Even though this program is much discussed, it has been implemented on less than 10% of the farms in North America. In Holsteins, less than 7% of calves registered are genomically tested. Breeders are obviously not confident with the lower accuracies and the much shorter generation intervals. So let’s dig deeper to see what the facts are when it comes to rates of genetic improvement. With the genomics program the relative importance between pathways shifts to where the Dams of Bulls (DB), at 40%, is the most important followed next by the Sires of Bulls (SB) at 34%. Again in this program, as in progeny testing, very limited selection pressure is applied to Dams of Cows (DC), pathway resulting in only 3% of the total progress. The relative ratios of improvement from sire and dam pathways is 57:43. The telltale important fact is that by using a genomic program the rate of annual genetic gain is 185% to 200% of what can be achieved by using the traditional progeny testing program. Another important difference between these two programs is that considerable money can be saved by only having to progeny test less than half as many young bulls with the genomic testing program.

Adding IVF gives 225 – 250%

Some breeders add IVF to their genomic selection program however due to costs and the challenge of mating carefully to avoid inbreeding it is not for everyone. The accuracies of this program match those of the genomic testing program, but the selection intensities are increased for the Sires of Cows (SC) pathway and greatly increased for the Dams of Cows (DC) pathway. For all pathways the generation intervals are short, something many breeders state as being a concern. These farms use IVF on maiden heifers to produce all of the next generation of animals. Again the most important pathway is the Dams of Bulls (DB) at 36%. However, the differences between emphasis on the pathways is narrowed. The ratio of emphasis sires to dams is 50:50. Farms employing this program can have annual rates of genetic gain of 225% to 250% compared to what is possible for herds using a progeny testing program. To fund this more expensive program breeders often sell surplus embryos or animals.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Determining which parent pathway is the most important rests with which testing and selection program a breeder wants to follow. For breeders using the traditional progeny testing program by far the most important animals are the sires of the young bulls (SB) that enter A.I. progeny testing programs. For breeders wanting to advance their herds at a faster rate by using the less accurate genomic information and shorter generation intervals, the dams of the bulls (DB) is the most important pathway. No matter which program a breeder chooses it is important to have a plan and always use the best available animals.

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

Dairy Breeders vs. Genetic Corporations: Who are the True Master Breeders?

· Comments (0)

Friday, March 21st, 2014

For the past two years we here at the Bullvine have been warning breeders about changes that will come as a result of large A.I. companies and other genetic corporations owning top females. The comment that many breeders come back to us with is,”I will take a “master breeder” over some geneticist any day.” As well they say, “If it was up to the geneticists, we would never have had sires like Goldwyn.”. Well we here at the Bullvine decided to take a closer look to see who the true master breeder is. Is it the Geneticist or is it the Seed Stock Breeder?

What makes a true master breeder?

For years the Master Breeder award has been one of the most coveted awards given out by breed associations. This award is the pinnacle of success for any purebred breeder. In Canada there have been 924 Master Breeders shields awarded since its inception in 1929. While Holstein USA does not have a master breeder program, it does have the Elite Breeder Award, bestowed annually upon a living Holstein Association USA, Inc. member, family, partnership, or corporation who has bred outstanding animals and thereby has made a notable contribution to the advancement of the Holstein breed in the United States. As well it designates the Herd of Excellence award which recognizes registered Holstein breeders who have bred and developed excellent herds made up of cows with superior type and production.

Except for the AltaGen herd, run by Alta Genetics, which won a Master Breeder shield in 2001, all the winners have been seed stock producers or, in the early years, government herds. But now, with the large A.I. companies and genetic corporations entering into the ownership of top females, this could be about to change. (Read more: Should A.I. Companies Own Females? And Why Good Business for AI Companies Can Mean Bad Business for Dairy Breeders)

Who owns the top genetics?

If you look at the top genomic index lists over the past 2 years, you will see six names consistently producing the top index animals. The names include De-Su, S-S-I (Select Sires), EDG (Elite Dairy Genomics now managed by Sexing Technologies), Alta Genetics, ABS Global, and the Co-Op program at Genex. Over the past year, more than 50% of the top 100 females have been owned by one of these companies. The interesting fact is that all but one, De-Su, is either a large A.I. company or a genetic corporation. So it is clear to see that these companies have already entered and are starting to win the race.

Now I know you are probably saying that just owning the top females does not make them a master breeder. And I agree it doesn’t. But what it does do is give them control of the genetic advancement race. (Read more: The Genomic Advancement Race – The Battle for Genetic Supremacy and What the Experts Will Tell You about Who Is Winning the Genetic Improvement Race) Sure there are some who think “Breeders can still breed a better next generation than the corporations can with all their number crunching and statistics.” That is because many feel that the geneticists at these corporations lack one key element and that is cattle sense. The knowledge that comes from working day in and day out with cows. The cow sense that makes cattle breeding part art form and part science. In my opinion, that is correct! Unfortunately, correct or not, it doesn’t matter. What really gives the geneticists at the large corporations the edge is the resources that are at their disposal.

It’s a question of resources, not cattle smarts

Let’s take a look at the typical seed stock producer versus the geneticist and just see who will produce that next list topper. The seed stock producer can probably afford to flush each animal 3-4 times per year in order to produce the next generation of great ones. Given typical ratios that would mean about 10 females a year and let’s say 10 males a year. Therefore, that breeder would have 20 progeny to compete with against the large genetic corporations. Now let’s look at the case for the large genetics corporations. First of all they already own the majority of the top genomic index animals so that they are already starting ahead of the game. But, more importantly, they can afford to flush their animals 10+ plus times a year. This gives them at least 50 plus females and over 50 males (and possibly 100 of each) to submit to the ranks of the genomic test gods.

It’s not that they are better about making sire selections, it’s that they can afford to flush each donor cow to every possible sire thus making sure they have all their bases covered. So yes I would not be surprised to see that the resulting ratios and consistency numbers of the Seed Stock producers end up being as good or better than that of the geneticists at the large corporations. However, geneticists at the large corporations have much greater resources at their disposal and, therefore, can afford to keep shooting until they get it right.

Of course there are those of you who are more discerning and say, “Let’s see who produces the better proven sires. After all that is where you find the true measure of a master breeder,” To them I say, look at the semen sales in the world today. More than 50% is genomic test sires. A bull getting a good daughter proof is less and less important, when it comes to winning the genetics race. (Read more: The End of the Daughter Proven Sire Era)

Another key factor is the significantly increased genetic reliabilities due to the introduction of genomics. In the past these geneticists were using data that was 30-40% reliable. Now with genomics the information is more than double that, taking what once was a scientific crapshoot, into an artful science. (Read more: The Truth About Genomic Indexes – “show me” that they work!, Genomics – Lies, Miss-Truths and False Publications! and The Genomic Bubble Has Burst?)

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The real question isn’t really about who are the better breeders. The real question comes down to who has the biggest pocketbook. Since the large A.I. companies have greater financial resources than those of the seed stock producer, they can afford to invest significantly more in order to win the genetic race. The time to have changed this situation isn’t today. The time to do something about it was two years ago when we told breeders that these corporations owning females would spell the end of the seed stock producers. It was a good business opportunity that was taken by the A.I. companies. They now have a relatively cost effective source for top genetics over which they have exclusive control. So, while the seed stock producers may be the better master breeders, unfortunately they may not be around long enough to enjoy their victory.

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

What Color Do You Bleed?

· Comments (0)

Friday, May 31st, 2013

There is no question dairy breeders as a whole are a very passionate group. For the most part, it’s not a “line of work” you get into for the money. Between the equity burden and the long hours, it also doesn’t appear to be a “sexy” choice in the opinion of outsiders looking into the industry. But the one thing that all those who are in the industry know is that breeders are also extremely loyal. And the one area where most breeders demonstrate this insane loyalty is to the A.I. companies they purchase their semen from. They pretty much bleed the colors of the A.I. company they support.

Such brand loyalty is something companies like Apple and Coke would die to have. While these two massive global brands spend billions in marketing to build brand loyalty, A.I. companies have done it in a very different way. They have done it through generation after generation of brain washing. That’s correct brain washing.

Is there any difference in the major A.I. companies?

Recently my staff was working on some brand research for GE and I gave them the exercise to look at the Artificial Insemination market and look at each of the major A.I. companies and tell me how each company was different. You know what they found? Nothing! For the most part they are all within 5% of each other for product offering. While some do offer a few more services, they all, for the most part, offer the same service.

This really got me to thinking, and remembering my days of running the roads selling semen. It actually made sense. When I went into herds that were well established and had been operating for generations, they pretty much bled the color of their local A.I. cooperative. However, when I went into herds that were new to the industry or herds where the operators came from other countries, I found them much more open to what I had to say.

While many of the companies are trying to position themselves differently in the market like Wal-Mart, Apple and Amazon in reality there really isn’t any difference. (Read more: A Wake-Up Call to All A.I. Companies) Even in our article, Semex – The Rise and Fall of a Semen Empire, we highlight how Semex grew rapidly and developed an extremely loyal following around the world by being different, by breeding “the Canadian Kind”. However, as they got bigger they started to lose their focus on what made them different and now from an outsider looking in it would appear to be no different from all the rest.

Thinking about this I wonder how much breeders are limiting their genetic advancement due to loyalty to a certain A.I. company? Yes there is not a great difference when you average out the top sires from each company, but why do you seek to be average? Wouldn’t it be best to just use the best each company has to offer and forget the rest?

I think part of the problem is that there seems to be very little difference between the top sires. Something I was shocked to see is that Canadian Dairy Network actually accentuates the issue. Instead of promoting how the LPI formula was better at spreading out the top sires and differentiating them, they actually adjusted the formula to make them all closer?

Now I have had it said to me that this was done at the request of the large A.I. companies because they wanted to sell more proven sire semen and needed the genomic test sires to look less attractive. There is some logic behind this, because young sires do produce less semen and there always seems to be a limited supply (Read more: $10,000 a dose Polled Semen and $750 Dollar Semen! Are you crazy?). But the breeder in me says, “What’s more important marketing semen or genetic advancement?”

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Sure the A.I. companies will give you nice hats, maybe even a few coats and shirts, but is that enough to trade your future for? As we have more and more options of companies to purchase semen from, and more and more ways to purchase the semen, I ask you three important questions. ”How much of your semen purchase is dictated by tradition or brand loyalty?” Moreover, “Is your decision based on what is genetically best for your herd?” And finally “Who bleeds for your bottom line?”

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

The Genetic Genius of Darwin, Mendel and Hunt – Genetic Transmission and the Holstein Cow

· Comments (4)

Wednesday, February 27th, 2013

There is no question that when it comes to understanding what cows will transmit and what cows will not, it is an enigma wrapped in a conundrum. There is much that we don’t know and some would argue it is not meant to be known. The problem is, for those of us with a passion for breeding great dairy cattle, we want to know it all. For that I turn to the three greatest genetic geniuses in the history of the world, Darwin, Mendel and Hunt (No they are not a law firm).

Charles Robert Darwin He established that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestors, and proposed the scientific theory that this branching pattern of evolution resulted from a process that he called natural selection, in which the struggle for existence has a similar effect to the artificial selection involved in selective breeding.

Charles Darwin

Ask anyone in the world to name a geneticist and the first name that comes to mind has to be Charles Darwin. No better demonstration of Darwin’s theory of evolution exists in the world than in dairy cattle breeding. While there is no question that artificial selection and selective breeding exist on a daily basis, a cow’s ability to reproduce and produce milk leads to a natural level of selection that epitomizes Darwin’s theory. “The laws governing inheritance,” Darwin wrote, “are for the most part unknown.” Moreover, while many modern geneticists have theories about the tendencies of the modern Holstein cow, their genetic transmission pathways in large part remain a mystery to this day.

Gregor Mendel

Then along came Gregor Mendel who introduced the concept of “genes” to explain heritability. Mendel changed the whole way we look at breeding when he introduced the theory that the chromosome is the carrier of genetic traits. He also explained why a trait can disappear in one generation and reappear in the next and why these traits occur in a three-to-one ratio. One of Mendel’s disciples, three quarters of a century later, was Thomas B. Macaulay. Macaulay conducted his own studies, on his Mount Victoria Farms (Read more: Mount Victoria Farms – The art and science of great breeding).

Thomas Hunt Morgan

Then along came Hunt. Well, more specifically, Thomas Hunt Morgan, but my ego wouldn’t let this go as my name is Andrew Morgan Hunt (Read more about my ego: I’m Sorry But I’ve Had Just About Enough Of… ). In research that is now reproduced by grade 9 science students around the world, Morgan introduced the concept of X and Y-chromosomes. Morgan concluded that a female has two X chromosomes and that males have both X and Y-chromosomes. He also posited that the male of the species, because of the presence of the Y chromosome, transmits differently than the female.

To get a better understanding of this, let’s look at this from both sides of the story.

His side of the story (XY)

If you look at Holstein bulls throughout history you find four distinct patterns:

Great daughters but no legacy sons
These are the bulls that sired amazing brood cows but none of their sons were able to continue their genetic legacy. Examples are Hanover-Hill Triple Threat, Carlin-M Ivanhoe Bell, and Braedale Goldwyn. They all were able to sire brood cow daughters beyond compare, but no real sons to advance that genetic legacy. Why did these sires seem to produce better on the female side than that of the male? For that we need to turn to Morgan and his X and Y chromosome theory. Since the Y chromosome is the only one that is inherited solely via the paternal line, this leads some geneticists to believe that it carries little genetic information, and as a result a great sires genetic legacy rest more with his daughters than with his sons. Therefore, with this first group of sires it is thought that much of their genetics were transmitted on the X chromosome rather than the Y.
Great sons but not as many brood cows
Bulls that sired outstanding sons but never produced a top daughter. A couple of great examples of this are Montvic Rag Apple Sovereign, Maizefield Bellwood and O-Bee Manfred Justice. All of these sires have left outstanding sons, but are not found as often in the maternal sire stack of the great sires. There is no question as to their genetic contribution to the breed, but it was more as a sire of sons than their ability to leave an equal number of brood cows.
Sons and daughters both extraordinary
These are the sires that have gone down in history as the all-time greats. Sires like Johanna Rag Apple Pabst, Governor of Carnation, Montvic Chieftain, Wisconsin Admiral Burke Lad, A.B.C. Reflection Sovereign, Round Oak Rag Apple Elevation, Pawnee Farm Alrinda Chief, Walkway Chief Mark, Hanoverhill Starbuck, Madawaska Aerostar and Maughlin Storm. These are the bulls that not only displayed personal greatness but were also able to transmit both outstanding brood cows as well as legacy sons.
Sons and daughters that were inferior
Sons and daughters that are both below average. These bulls left inferior daughters and as a result were never even given the chance to produce sons. Bulls in this category are too numerous to mention and loads of their daughters go to the slaughterhouses every day. No explanation necessary other than a lack of genetic merit and here enters the need for genomics (Read more: The Truth About Genomic Indexes – “Show Me” That They Work).

Her side the story (XX)

The female side of the story uses the same four distinct groups.

Great daughters but no legacy sons
These are cows with outstanding female descendants but undistinguished males. Great examples of these are the cow families of Hanover Hill Papoose, Krull Broker Elegance and Plunshanski Chief Faith. They all were able to leave outstanding female descendants generation after generation, but were never really able to accomplish the same feat on the male side of the story.
Great sons but not as many brood cows
These are the cows with potent transmitting sons, but daughters who didn’t outperform the average. Examples of these are Wylamyna Tidy Kathleen (dam of Sir Bess Tidy and Sir Bess Ormsby Tidy Fobes) Lakefield Fobes Delight (dam of Lakefield Fond Hope, Lakefield Fond Delight Fobes and Carnation Royal Master) and Pawnee Farm Glenvue Beauty (dam of Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief). All of these cows had outstanding maternal lines but for some reason were just not able to transmit that legacy through their daughters.
Sons and daughters both extraordinary
Among the females in this category are Glenridge Citation Roxy, Mil-R-Mor Roxette, Comestar Laurie Sheik, Braedale Gypsy Grand and Snow-N Denises Dellia.
Sons and daughters that were inferior
Cows who, in terms of influence, failed to produce anything worthwhile. Blame it on lack of genetics, bad breeding, improper management, or just bad luck, these cows just didn’t influence the breed. We have all seen examples.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

There has never been a clear explanation of why some bloodlines seem to transmit better through maternal lines, others through the paternal, and still others do well in both. Even genomics does not answer this. There are high genomic animals that still have these same tendencies. Maybe if we could genomic test the genes on each chromosome we might find the answers? Until then Genetic Transmission in the Holstein Cow will remain a mystery.

To read more about this get a copy of The Holstein History by Edward Morwick and read the chapter on Inheritance Patterns.

Not sure what all this hype about genomics is all about?

Want to learn what it is and what it means to your breeding program?

Download this free guide.

Search

Archive for Genetic Advancement

Monthly Genetic Evaluations to Boost Top-Rated Canadian Dairy Cow Rankings in 2025

Uncover the potential of Lactanet’s 2025 monthly genetic evaluations to elevate your Canadian dairy cows to premier status. Are your herds positioned to gain from this groundbreaking update? Learn more today.

Driving Genetic Progress: How Lactanet Canada Shapes the Future of Dairy Herds

Unveiling Hidden Potentials: Addressing the Genetic Evaluation Gaps in Owner-Sampled Herds

Proposed Monthly Genetic Evaluations: A Game Changer for Owner-Sampled Dairy Herds

Implications for Breeders: Expanding the Genetic Horizon with Monthly Evaluations

Precision and Reliability: Lactanet’s Multifaceted Genetic Evaluation Process

Technological Advancements: The Role of Automated Milking Systems in Modern Dairy Farming

Genomics and Unsupervised Testing: A New Era of Equitable Genetic Evaluations

Mapping the Road Ahead: Key Milestones for Implementing Lactanet’s New Genetic Evaluation System

The Bottom Line

Key Takeaways:

Summary:

Learn more:

Sire vs. Dam – Which has a Greater Impact on Your Herd’s Genetic Improvement?

3 Factors Determine Genetic Advancement

Four Pathways for Improvement

Which Breeding Scheme is the Best?

Comparison of Genetic Improvement Schemes

Progeny Testing has Served Breeders Well

Genomics gives 185 – 200%

Adding IVF gives 225 – 250%

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Other posts you might like:

Dairy Breeders vs. Genetic Corporations: Who are the True Master Breeders?

What makes a true master breeder?

Who owns the top genetics?

It’s a question of resources, not cattle smarts

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Other posts you might like:

What Color Do You Bleed?

Is there any difference in the major A.I. companies?

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Other posts you might like:

The Genetic Genius of Darwin, Mendel and Hunt – Genetic Transmission and the Holstein Cow

His side of the story (XY)

Her side the story (XX)

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Other posts you might like:

News

Recent Posts

Tags

Recent Articles

News