|
|
| Acceso al texto completo restringido a Biblioteca INIA Las Brujas. Por información adicional contacte bibliolb@inia.org.uy. |
Registro completo
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
Fecha : |
26/11/2015 |
Actualizado : |
15/10/2019 |
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
Autor : |
CARDOSO, F. F.; GOMES, C.C.G.; SOLLERO, B. P.; OLIVEIRA, M. M.; ROSO, V. M.; PICCOLI, M. L.; HIGA, R. H.; YOKOO, M. J.; CAETANO, A. R.; AGUILAR, I. |
Afiliación : |
F. F. CARDOSO, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); Universidad Federal de Pelotas; C.C.G. GOMES, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); B. P. SOLLERO, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); M.M. OLIVEIRA, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); V.M. ROSO, Gensys Associated Consulants; M.L. PICCOLI, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); R.H. HIGA, Gensys Associated Consulants; Universidad Federal de Rio Grande Do Sul (UFRGS); M.J. YOKKO, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); A.R. CAETANO, EMBRAPA (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária); IGNACIO AGUILAR GARCIA, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
Título : |
Genomic prediction for tick resistance in Braford and Hereford cattle. |
Fecha de publicación : |
2015 |
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Journal of Animal Science, 2015. v. 95, p. 2693-2705. Published June 25, 2015 |
DOI : |
10.2527/jas2014-8832 |
Idioma : |
Inglés |
Notas : |
Article history: Received December 19, 2014 / Accepted April 6, 2015. |
Contenido : |
ABSTRACT.
One of the main animal health problems in tropical and subtropical cattle production is the bovine tick, which causes decreased performance, hide devaluation, increased production costs with acaricide treatments, and transmission of infectious diseases. This study investigated the utility of genomic prediction as a tool to select Braford (BO) and Hereford (HH) cattle resistant to ticks. The accuracy and bias of different methods for direct and blended genomic prediction was assessed using 10,673 tick counts obtained from 3,435 BO and
928 HH cattle belonging to the Delta G Connection breeding program. A subset of 2,803 BO and 652 HH samples were genotyped and 41,045 markers remained after quality control. Log transformed records were adjusted by a pedigree repeatability model to estimate variance components, genetic parameters, and breeding values (EBV) and subsequently used to obtain deregressed EBV. Estimated heritability and repeatability for tick counts were 0.19 ± 0.03 and 0.29 ± 0.01, respectively. Data were split into 5 subsets using k-means and random clustering for cross-validation of genomic predictions. Depending on the method, direct genomic value (DGV) prediction accuracies ranged from 0.35 with Bayes least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) to 0.39 with BayesB for k-means clustering and between 0.42 with BayesLASSO and 0.45 with BayesC for random clustering. All genomic methods were superior to pedigree BLUP (PBLUP) accuracies of 0.26 for k-means and 0.29 for random groups, with highest accuracy gains obtained with BayesB (39%) for k-means and BayesC (55%) for random groups. Blending of historical phenotypic and pedigree information by different methods further increased DGV
accuracies by values between 0.03 and 0.05 for direct prediction methods. However, highest accuracy was observed with single-step genomic BLUP with values of 0.48 for k-means and 0.56, which represent, respectively, 84 and 93% improvement over PBLUP. Observed random clustering cross-validation breedspecific accuracies ranged between 0.29 and 0.36 for HH and between 0.55 and 0.61 for BO, depending on the blending method. These moderately high values for BO demonstrate that genomic predictions could be used as a practical tool to improve genetic resistance to ticks and in the development of resistant lines of this breed. For HH, accuracies are still in the low to moderate side and this breed training population needs to be increased before genomic selection could be reliably applied to improve tick resistance.
© 2015 American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. MenosABSTRACT.
One of the main animal health problems in tropical and subtropical cattle production is the bovine tick, which causes decreased performance, hide devaluation, increased production costs with acaricide treatments, and transmission of infectious diseases. This study investigated the utility of genomic prediction as a tool to select Braford (BO) and Hereford (HH) cattle resistant to ticks. The accuracy and bias of different methods for direct and blended genomic prediction was assessed using 10,673 tick counts obtained from 3,435 BO and
928 HH cattle belonging to the Delta G Connection breeding program. A subset of 2,803 BO and 652 HH samples were genotyped and 41,045 markers remained after quality control. Log transformed records were adjusted by a pedigree repeatability model to estimate variance components, genetic parameters, and breeding values (EBV) and subsequently used to obtain deregressed EBV. Estimated heritability and repeatability for tick counts were 0.19 ± 0.03 and 0.29 ± 0.01, respectively. Data were split into 5 subsets using k-means and random clustering for cross-validation of genomic predictions. Depending on the method, direct genomic value (DGV) prediction accuracies ranged from 0.35 with Bayes least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) to 0.39 with BayesB for k-means clustering and between 0.42 with BayesLASSO and 0.45 with BayesC for random clustering. All genomic methods were superior to pedigree BLUP (PBLUP) accuracies of 0.26 f... Presentar Todo |
Palabras claves : |
BEEF CATLLE; GENOMIC SELECTION; HEALTH; TICK RESISTANCE. |
Thesagro : |
GANADO DE CARNE; MEJORAMIENTO GENETICO ANIMAL; SALUD. |
Asunto categoría : |
L10 Genética y mejoramiento animal |
Marc : |
LEADER 03639naa a2200337 a 4500 001 1054002 005 2019-10-15 008 2015 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d 024 7 $a10.2527/jas2014-8832$2DOI 100 1 $aCARDOSO, F. F. 245 $aGenomic prediction for tick resistance in Braford and Hereford cattle.$h[electronic resource] 260 $c2015 500 $aArticle history: Received December 19, 2014 / Accepted April 6, 2015. 520 $aABSTRACT. One of the main animal health problems in tropical and subtropical cattle production is the bovine tick, which causes decreased performance, hide devaluation, increased production costs with acaricide treatments, and transmission of infectious diseases. This study investigated the utility of genomic prediction as a tool to select Braford (BO) and Hereford (HH) cattle resistant to ticks. The accuracy and bias of different methods for direct and blended genomic prediction was assessed using 10,673 tick counts obtained from 3,435 BO and 928 HH cattle belonging to the Delta G Connection breeding program. A subset of 2,803 BO and 652 HH samples were genotyped and 41,045 markers remained after quality control. Log transformed records were adjusted by a pedigree repeatability model to estimate variance components, genetic parameters, and breeding values (EBV) and subsequently used to obtain deregressed EBV. Estimated heritability and repeatability for tick counts were 0.19 ± 0.03 and 0.29 ± 0.01, respectively. Data were split into 5 subsets using k-means and random clustering for cross-validation of genomic predictions. Depending on the method, direct genomic value (DGV) prediction accuracies ranged from 0.35 with Bayes least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) to 0.39 with BayesB for k-means clustering and between 0.42 with BayesLASSO and 0.45 with BayesC for random clustering. All genomic methods were superior to pedigree BLUP (PBLUP) accuracies of 0.26 for k-means and 0.29 for random groups, with highest accuracy gains obtained with BayesB (39%) for k-means and BayesC (55%) for random groups. Blending of historical phenotypic and pedigree information by different methods further increased DGV accuracies by values between 0.03 and 0.05 for direct prediction methods. However, highest accuracy was observed with single-step genomic BLUP with values of 0.48 for k-means and 0.56, which represent, respectively, 84 and 93% improvement over PBLUP. Observed random clustering cross-validation breedspecific accuracies ranged between 0.29 and 0.36 for HH and between 0.55 and 0.61 for BO, depending on the blending method. These moderately high values for BO demonstrate that genomic predictions could be used as a practical tool to improve genetic resistance to ticks and in the development of resistant lines of this breed. For HH, accuracies are still in the low to moderate side and this breed training population needs to be increased before genomic selection could be reliably applied to improve tick resistance. © 2015 American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. 650 $aGANADO DE CARNE 650 $aMEJORAMIENTO GENETICO ANIMAL 650 $aSALUD 653 $aBEEF CATLLE 653 $aGENOMIC SELECTION 653 $aHEALTH 653 $aTICK RESISTANCE 700 1 $aGOMES, C.C.G. 700 1 $aSOLLERO, B. P. 700 1 $aOLIVEIRA, M. M. 700 1 $aROSO, V. M. 700 1 $aPICCOLI, M. L. 700 1 $aHIGA, R. H. 700 1 $aYOKOO, M. J. 700 1 $aCAETANO, A. R. 700 1 $aAGUILAR, I. 773 $tJournal of Animal Science, 2015.$gv. 95, p. 2693-2705. Published June 25, 2015
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
|
Registro completo
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
Fecha actual : |
19/07/2021 |
Actualizado : |
19/07/2021 |
Tipo de producción científica : |
Informes Agroclimáticos |
Autor : |
INIA (INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE INVESTIGACIÓN AGROPECUARIA); GRAS |
Afiliación : |
UNIDAD DE AGROCLIMA Y SISTEMAS DE INFORMACIÓN, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
Título : |
Informe agroclimático 2021- Situación a Junio. |
Fecha de publicación : |
2021 |
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Montevideo (Uruguay): INIA, 2021. |
Páginas : |
5 p. |
Serie : |
(Informe Agroclimático; Año 16, No.6) |
Idioma : |
Español |
Notas : |
Equipo de trabajo INIA-GRAS (Unidad de Agtech y sistemas de Información): Adrián Cal, Guadalupe Tiscornia, Carlos Schiavi, Gabriel García. |
Contenido : |
Contenido. Síntesis de la Situación Agroclimática de Junio-- Perspectivas Climáticas Trimestrales elaboradas por el IRI de la Universidad de Columbia -- Índice de Vegetación (NDVI) -- Precipitaciones -- Porcentaje de Agua Disponible (PAD) -- Índice de Bienestar Hídrico (IBH) -- Agua No Retenida (ANR) -- Perspectivas Climáticas --Jul-Ago-Set elaboradas por el IRI de la Universidad de Columbia. Destacamos para este mes: Previsión de condiciones ambientales para corderos recién nacidos. Link directo: http://www.inia.uy/gras/Alertas-y-herramientas/Prevision%20Corderos |
Palabras claves : |
AGROCLIMA; AGTECH; BOLETIN AGROCLIMÁTICO; CARACTERIZACIÓN AGROCLIMÁTICA; DIRECCION VIENTO; ESTACIONES AGROMETEOROLOGICAS; ESTACIONES AUTOMATICAS; ESTACIONES INIA; ESTADO DEL TIEMPO; GRAFICAS AGROCLIMATICAS; GRAS; INFORMACION SATELITAL; INFORME AGROCLIMÁTICO 2021; INUNDACIONES; LLUVIAS DIARIAS; MAXIMA; MEDIA; MINIMA; PANEL SOLAR; PERSPECTIVAS CLIMATICAS; PLUVIOMETRO; PRECIPITACION NACIONAL; PREVENCION HELADAS; PRONOSTICO; SENSOR; SIMETRICO; TANQUE A; TERMOCUPLAS; TERMOHIDROGRAFO; VARIABLES AGROCLIMATICAS; VELETA. |
Thesagro : |
AGROCLIMATOLOGIA; CAMBIO CLIMÁTICO; CLIMA; CLIMATOLOGIA; ESTACIONES METEOROLOGICAS; ESTRES HIDRICO; EVAPOTRANSPIRACION; HUMEDAD; HUMEDAD RELATIVA; LLUVIA; METEOROLOGIA; PERSPECTIVAS; PLUVIOMETROS; PRONOSTICO DEL TIEMPO; SENSORES; SISTEMAS; SISTEMAS DE INFORMACION; TEMPERATURA; TERMOMETROS. |
Asunto categoría : |
P40 Meteorología y climatología |
URL : |
http://inia.uy/Publicaciones/Documentos%20compartidos/Informe%20agroclimatico%20INIA-GRAS%20Junio%20de%202021.pdf
|
Marc : |
LEADER 02750nam a2200757 a 4500 001 1062314 005 2021-07-19 008 2021 bl uuuu u0uu1 u #d 100 1 $aINIA (INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE INVESTIGACIÓN AGROPECUARIA) 245 $aInforme agroclimático 2021- Situación a Junio.$h[electronic resource] 260 $aMontevideo (Uruguay): INIA$c2021 300 $a5 p. 490 $a(Informe Agroclimático; Año 16, No.6) 500 $aEquipo de trabajo INIA-GRAS (Unidad de Agtech y sistemas de Información): Adrián Cal, Guadalupe Tiscornia, Carlos Schiavi, Gabriel García. 520 $aContenido. Síntesis de la Situación Agroclimática de Junio-- Perspectivas Climáticas Trimestrales elaboradas por el IRI de la Universidad de Columbia -- Índice de Vegetación (NDVI) -- Precipitaciones -- Porcentaje de Agua Disponible (PAD) -- Índice de Bienestar Hídrico (IBH) -- Agua No Retenida (ANR) -- Perspectivas Climáticas --Jul-Ago-Set elaboradas por el IRI de la Universidad de Columbia. Destacamos para este mes: Previsión de condiciones ambientales para corderos recién nacidos. Link directo: http://www.inia.uy/gras/Alertas-y-herramientas/Prevision%20Corderos 650 $aAGROCLIMATOLOGIA 650 $aCAMBIO CLIMÁTICO 650 $aCLIMA 650 $aCLIMATOLOGIA 650 $aESTACIONES METEOROLOGICAS 650 $aESTRES HIDRICO 650 $aEVAPOTRANSPIRACION 650 $aHUMEDAD 650 $aHUMEDAD RELATIVA 650 $aLLUVIA 650 $aMETEOROLOGIA 650 $aPERSPECTIVAS 650 $aPLUVIOMETROS 650 $aPRONOSTICO DEL TIEMPO 650 $aSENSORES 650 $aSISTEMAS 650 $aSISTEMAS DE INFORMACION 650 $aTEMPERATURA 650 $aTERMOMETROS 653 $aAGROCLIMA 653 $aAGTECH 653 $aBOLETIN AGROCLIMÁTICO 653 $aCARACTERIZACIÓN AGROCLIMÁTICA 653 $aDIRECCION VIENTO 653 $aESTACIONES AGROMETEOROLOGICAS 653 $aESTACIONES AUTOMATICAS 653 $aESTACIONES INIA 653 $aESTADO DEL TIEMPO 653 $aGRAFICAS AGROCLIMATICAS 653 $aGRAS 653 $aINFORMACION SATELITAL 653 $aINFORME AGROCLIMÁTICO 2021 653 $aINUNDACIONES 653 $aLLUVIAS DIARIAS 653 $aMAXIMA 653 $aMEDIA 653 $aMINIMA 653 $aPANEL SOLAR 653 $aPERSPECTIVAS CLIMATICAS 653 $aPLUVIOMETRO 653 $aPRECIPITACION NACIONAL 653 $aPREVENCION HELADAS 653 $aPRONOSTICO 653 $aSENSOR 653 $aSIMETRICO 653 $aTANQUE A 653 $aTERMOCUPLAS 653 $aTERMOHIDROGRAFO 653 $aVARIABLES AGROCLIMATICAS 653 $aVELETA 700 1 $aGRAS
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|