Outline BIF sub-committee report on Discussion of current state of - PDF document

Larry Keuhn, U.S. Meat Animal Research 6/1/17 Center Outline BIF sub-committee report on • Discussion of current state of the ABEPD across-breed EPD programs: system and possible changes proposed improvements • Update on current sampling and progress in the USMARC Germplasm Evaluation Larry Kuehn Program (GPE) USDA, ARS, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center The USDA is an equal opportunity employer ABEPD program breed differences Across Breed EPD adjustment factors • Across-breed EPD program • Calculated by scaling the ‘current’ breed – Estimate breed differences from GPE using a difference ( B i ) to Angus EPD base sire and dam model (F 1 progeny records) – Current breed difference is 2015 this year – Adjust records for bull EPD – Base difference calculated by subtracting the 2015 Angus average EPD from the 2015 B USMARC / b ( EPD EPD ) = + i i i , YY i , USMARC breed average EPD • EPD i , YY is the breed average EPD (current) • For Breed i: • EPD i , USMARC weighted average USMARC sire EPD where weight is the sum of numerator relationships Factor i = B i - B Angus - (EPD i - EPD Angus ) between sires and progeny with phenotypes • b is a scaling factor to convert USMARC solution to an industry scale Gene$c ¡Trends ¡for ¡Yearling ¡Weight, ¡lb ¡ Goal – multibreed ¡ 100 • Use breed differences from GPE to help 75 parameterize International Genetic Solutions 50 multibreed model 25 0 • We want to get to a point where the adjustment -25 factor is the same (to Angus) for breeds in the IGS multibreed model -50 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Hereford Angus Red Angus Simmental • Currently in prototype stage Gelbvieh Limousin Charolais Shorthorn Beefmaster Brangus Santa Gertrudis Maine Anjou Chiangus Salers Adapted from Spring 2016 Genetic Trends from Breed Associations and 2016 AB-EPD factors 2017 BIF Symposium, Athens, Ga 1

Larry Keuhn, U.S. Meat Animal Research 6/1/17 Center Goal – multibreed BIF Working Group • Even after breed differences incorporated • Committee was formed at midyear BIF into IGS multibreed, not all breeds are board meeting to discuss multibreed active participants evaluation and the ABEPD system and ways to facilitate multiple release dates of – Still a need for ABEPD or a similar system to adjust EPDs to a comparable scale the factors (January 2017) – Many trait complexes do not fit a simple Darrh Bullock Matt Spangler additive EPD adjustment Larry Kuehn Mark Thallman – Need to continue to think about ways to Wade Shafer Lauren Hyde deliver information in a timely manner if not in Joe Epperly Larry Keenan real time Bob Weaber BIF Working Group Goals • Main conclusions • Short term – ABEPD adjustment factors still necessary for – Starting this year, we will begin to target comparison of bulls across breed even for release of ABEPD factors early in the breeds involved in IGS multibreed calendar year • Write-up in eBeef.org February 2017 newsletter • USMARC will derive differences in late fall after weaning weights for spring calves have been – Expedited release of factors prior to high- recorded volume spring bulls buying season would be • We will need a feel for when breed associations desirable can provide updates on GPE bulls and breed • Particularly important when breeds change their average EPDs from their NCE base Release of ABEPD Goals • Will also be releasing a new set of ABEPD • Long term adjustment factors later this summer – Would like a dedicated web-based system where breed associations can update their – American Angus Association will be information (bulls, averages) and USMARC implementing changes to their NCE can adjust breed differences on their own • Potential effect on all breeds in the ABEPD system schedule – Have a few other breeds that have let me – Resulting factors would change in real-time know that things have changed in their spring based on data input from either source release since we obtained EPDs in Feb/Mar 2017 BIF Symposium, Athens, Ga 2

Larry Keuhn, U.S. Meat Animal Research 6/1/17 Center Web-based implementation GPE sampling/progress • Could also be used to accommodate • Have been transitioning from ‘Cycle-based’ several other goals we’ve been proposing system to continuous sampling of industry for seveal years sires from 18 breeds for approximately 10 years – Decision support systems – Non-additive EPD adjustment (calving ease, • Beginning to achieve goal of graded-up longevity/stayability, fertility) females from each breed with targeted – We continue to seek funding to implement this crosses of several breed type of system, but we will need industry • Targeting high accuracy (particularly sex support to fully realize this goal and age limited traits) bulls based on current sire usage within breed GPE Target Population Structure Current progress to target AI Sires: AN, HH, SM, CH, AR, LM, GV, SH, BN, BM, MA, BR, CI, SG, SA, BV, SD, TA Breed ¡ 7/8+ ¡ 3/4 ¡ Breed ¡ 7/8+ ¡ 3/4 ¡ Angus ¡ 77 ¡ 99 ¡ Beefmaster ¡ 14 ¡ 35 ¡ Hereford ¡ 90 ¡ 64 ¡ Maine ¡Anjou ¡ 26 ¡ 31 ¡ � Simmental ¡ 74 ¡ 82 ¡ Brahman ¡ 1 ¡ 8 ¡ Charolais ¡ 73 ¡ 60 ¡ Santa ¡Gertrudis ¡ 26 ¡ 13 ¡ Red ¡Angus ¡ 54 ¡ 32 ¡ Chiangus ¡ 16 ¡ 22 ¡ Limousin ¡ 52 ¡ 31 ¡ Salers ¡ 23 ¡ 19 ¡ Gelbvieh ¡ 44 ¡ 29 ¡ Braunvieh ¡ 16 ¡ 16 ¡ PB & F 1 Steers PB & F 1 Bulls PB & F 1 Heifers Shorthorn ¡ 27 ¡ 47 ¡ South ¡Devon ¡ 8 ¡ 14 ¡ � Brangus ¡ 17 ¡ 52 ¡ Tarentaise ¡ 5 ¡ 15 ¡ These are approximately half of the GPE cows with the remainder being crosses Natural Service PB, F 1 , & F 1 2 Steers & Heifers GPE sampling process GPE sampling process • We have sampled approximately 930 bulls • Process can be fairly difficult to achieve since beginning continuous sampling in and is time consuming 2006 – Generally target 180-200 bulls every two years – Traditionally have asked for enough straws to service 20-25 cows with some extra for DNA • More bulls from larger breeds, but and connections proportional to registrations, breeds with • Target 10-12 progeny per bull fewer registered animals have a much – Becoming more difficult to find unique lines higher percentage of bulls sampled • Especially in breeds with fewer registrations 2017 BIF Symposium, Athens, Ga 3

Larry Keuhn, U.S. Meat Animal Research 6/1/17 Center Changes Another possible change • We are considering asking for 40-50 • We are currently releasing (or have straws per bull and sampling fewer bulls in students working with) several trait the next round (this coming year) complexes that would be considered novel – Generally not part of NCE for most breeds • Would like any thoughts on perceived • We are wondering about the impact of implications toward breed differences releasing ‘multibreed’ EPDs from these bulls to the industry Current novel trait projects Releasing EPD • USMARC cattle • Who to release to? – Feed intake/efficiency – Breed association? BIF? Steer (concentrate) Transcriptomics Heifer (roughage) Metabolomics • Can we release for bulls that we’ve already Cow (mature intake) Metagenomics sampled? – E. coli shedding – Do breeders have a right to refuse release if – BRDC resistance they haven’t been contacted? – Fertility (direct/indirect) – Many of the bulls we’ve sampled in the past – Meat quality including tenderness 10 years are fairly old now – Cow efficiency • Would make this release part of future – Cow longevity semen solicitation process Increasing progeny per sire Future of GPE • While this change is being considered • We see this release of EPDs as a helpful primarily to decrease our sampling byproduct, but not a primary service process, it would produce more progeny – Yearly updates would not occur records for these novel trait complexes • Would be summarized when breed differences are updated • No way to guarantee sires will have equal • Please let us know your thoughts as we progeny numbers or sex distribution will be consider these changes equal as of now 2017 BIF Symposium, Athens, Ga 4

Larry Keuhn, U.S. Meat Animal Research 6/1/17 Center Questions 2017 BIF Symposium, Athens, Ga 5