Within-breed selection is sufficient to improve terminal crossbred beef marbling: a review of reciprocal recurrent genomic selection
R. A. McEwin
A C , M. L. Hebart A , H. Oakey A B and W. S. Pitchford A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Davies Livestock Research Centre, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.
B Robinson Research Institute, Norwich Centre, 55 King William Street, North Adelaide, SA 5006, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: rudi.mcewin@adelaide.edu.au
Animal Production Science - https://doi.org/10.1071/AN21085
Submitted: 15 February 2021 Accepted: 27 May 2021 Published online: 5 August 2021
Abstract
Reciprocal recurrent selection is the selection of purebreds for crossbred performance and takes advantage of additive and non-additive variance by using pedigreed progeny performance records. Developed in maize, the adoption of this approach in livestock breeding has been limited to the pork and poultry industries; genomic selection may facilitate its extension into the beef industry by replacing pedigree. The literature regarding the relative importance of additive versus non-additive variance and reciprocal recurrent genomic selection models was reviewed. The potential for using reciprocal recurrent genomic selection in a terminal Wagyu × Angus cross scenario was examined. Non-additive variance is more important for fitness traits and accounts for a small proportion of variance related to production traits such as marbling. In general, reciprocal recurrent selection was not significantly better at improving performance of crossbreds than was traditional selection within parental breeds using only additive variance in the studies examined. Simulation studies showed benefits of including dominance or breed-specific allele effects in prediction models but advantages were small as more realistic simulations were examined. On the basis of the evidence, it is likely that in a terminal two-way cross-beef scenario utilising Wagyu sires and Angus dams, where selection emphasis is on marbling, selection of purebreds on the basis of additive variance will allow substantial progress to be realised.
Keywords: breed-specific allele effects, crossbred performance, heterosis, non-additive variance.
References
Aliloo H, Pryce JE, Gonzalez-Recio O, Cocks BG, Hayes BJ (2016) Accounting for dominance to improve genomic evaluations of dairy cows for fertility and milk production traits Genetics, Selection, Evolution 48, 8.Banks R (1995) Better genetic technology: developments in the Australian lamb industry. Proceedings of the Australian Association of Animal Breeding and Genetics 11, 48–54.
Bijma P, Woolliams J, Van Arendonk J (2001) Genetic gain of pure line selection and combined crossbred purebred selection with constrained inbreeding. Animal Science 72, 225–232.
| Genetic gain of pure line selection and combined crossbred purebred selection with constrained inbreeding.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bolormaa S, Pryce JE, Zhang Y, Reverter A, Barendse W, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2015) Non-additive genetic variation in growth, carcass and fertility traits of beef cattle. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 47, 26
| Non-additive genetic variation in growth, carcass and fertility traits of beef cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25880217PubMed |
Brethour JR (1995) Tracking the development of marbling in steers on full feed. Agricultural Research Centre-Hays. KAES Report of Progress 833, 1–3.
Brito LF, McEwan JC, Miller SP, Pickering NK, Bain WE, Dodds KG, Schenkel FS, Clarke SM (2017) Genetic diversity of a New Zealand multi-breed sheep population and composite breeds’ history revealed by a high-density SNP chip. BMC Genetics 18, 25
| Genetic diversity of a New Zealand multi-breed sheep population and composite breeds’ history revealed by a high-density SNP chip.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28288558PubMed |
Calhoon RE, Bohren B (1974) Genetic gains from reciprocal recurrent and within-line selection for egg production in the fowl. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 44, 364–372.
| Genetic gains from reciprocal recurrent and within-line selection for egg production in the fowl.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24424569PubMed |
Comstock RE, Robinson H, Harvey P (1949) Breeding procedure designed to make maximum use of both general and specific combining ability. Agronomy Journal 41, 360–367.
| Breeding procedure designed to make maximum use of both general and specific combining ability.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Davenport CB (1908) Degeneration, albinism, and inbreeding. Science 28, 454–455.
| Degeneration, albinism, and inbreeding.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17771943PubMed |
de Roos APW, Hayes BJ, Spelman RJ, Goddard ME (2008) Linkage disequilibrium and persistence of phase in Holstein–Friesian, Jersey and Angus cattle. Genetics 179, 1503–1512.
| Linkage disequilibrium and persistence of phase in Holstein–Friesian, Jersey and Angus cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
de Roos APW, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2009) Reliability of genomic predictions across multiple populations. Genetics 183, 1545–1553.
| Reliability of genomic predictions across multiple populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dekkers JCM (2007) Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance. Journal of Animal Science 85, 2104–2114.
| Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Duenk P, Calus MP, Wientjes YC, Breen VP, Henshall JM, Hawken R, Bijma P (2019) Validation of genomic predictions for body weight in broilers using crossbred information and considering breed-of-origin of alleles. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 51, 1–12.
East EM (1908) Inbreeding in corn. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station Report 1907, 419–428.
Erbe M, Hayes B, Matukumalli L, Goswami S, Bowman P, Reich C, Mason B, Goddard M (2012) Improving accuracy of genomic predictions within and between dairy cattle breeds with imputed high-density single nucleotide polymorphism panels. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 4114–4129.
| Improving accuracy of genomic predictions within and between dairy cattle breeds with imputed high-density single nucleotide polymorphism panels.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22720968PubMed |
Esfandyari H, Bijma P, Henryon M, Christensen OF, Sorensen AC (2016) Genomic prediction of crossbred performance based on purebred Landrace and Yorkshire data using a dominance model. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 48, 40
| Genomic prediction of crossbred performance based on purebred Landrace and Yorkshire data using a dominance model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27276993PubMed |
Falconer DS, Mackay TFC (1996) ‘Introduction to quantitative genetics.’ (Longman Group: Harlow, UK)
Fogarty NM, Gilmour AR, Hopkins DL (1997) The relationship of crossbred lamb growth and carcass traits with LAMBPLAN EBVs of sires. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 12, 304–309.
Ford EB (1945) Polymorphism. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 20, 73–88.
| Polymorphism.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Goddard ME, Hayes BJ, Meuwissen TH (2010) Genomic selection in livestock populations. Genetical Research 92, 413–421.
| Genomic selection in livestock populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Graser H, Hammond K (1985) Mixed model procedures for the Australian beef industry. 1. Multiple-trait model for estimation of breeding values for 200-day and final weights of cattle. Crop and Pasture Science 36, 527–535.
| Mixed model procedures for the Australian beef industry. 1. Multiple-trait model for estimation of breeding values for 200-day and final weights of cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Griesbach L (1962) A test of the reciprocal recurrent selection technique with chicken broilers. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 42, 145–157.
| A test of the reciprocal recurrent selection technique with chicken broilers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Habier D, Tetens J, Seefried F-R, Lichtner P, Thaller G (2010) The impact of genetic relationship information on genomic breeding values in German Holstein cattle. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 42, 5
| The impact of genetic relationship information on genomic breeding values in German Holstein cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20170500PubMed |
Hall DG, Fogarty NM, Holst PJ, Gilmour AR, Banks R, Luff AF (1992) Growth and carcase fatness of ewe lambs sired by rams with different LAMBPLAN estimated breeding values. Proceedings of the Australian Association of Animal Breeding and Genetics 10, 316–319.
Hall DG, Fogarty NM, Holst PJ (1997) Valuing lamb sires: the effect of estimated breeding values for weight and fat in a declining lamb market. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 12, 355–359.
Hallauer AR, Carena MJ, Filho JBM (2010) ‘Quantitative genetics in maize breeding.’ (Springer New York: New York, NY, USA)
Hayes BJ, Goddard M (2008) Prediction of breeding values using marker-derived relationship matrices. Journal of Animal Science 86, 2089–2092.
| Prediction of breeding values using marker-derived relationship matrices.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18407982PubMed |
Hayes BJ, Bowman PJ, Chamberlain AC, Verbyla K, Goddard ME (2009) Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 41, 1–9.
| Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hebart ML, Lee SJ, Pitchford WS (2021) The benefits of carcass estimated breeding values for pasture-finished cattle are not as great as for long-fed cattle. Animal Production Science 61, 326–332.
| The benefits of carcass estimated breeding values for pasture-finished cattle are not as great as for long-fed cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hegarty RS, Shands C, Marchant R, Hopkins DL, Ball AJ, Harden S (2006) Effects of available nutrition and sire breeding values for growth and muscling on the development of crossbred lambs. 1: growth and carcass characteristics. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 57, 593–603.
| Effects of available nutrition and sire breeding values for growth and muscling on the development of crossbred lambs. 1: growth and carcass characteristics.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Heizer EE, Hervey MC, Barrett GR, Brandt GW (1938) Nicking in dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Science 1938, 67–72.
Henderson CR (1976) A simple method for computing the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in prediction of breeding values. Biometrics 32, 69–83.
| A simple method for computing the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in prediction of breeding values.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Henderson CR (1984) ‘Applications of linear models in animal breeding.’ (University of Guelph Press: Guelph, Canada)
Hill WG, Goddard ME, Visscher PM (2008) Data and theory point to mainly additive genetic variance for complex traits. PLOS Genetics 4, e1000008
| Data and theory point to mainly additive genetic variance for complex traits.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18454194PubMed |
Hunton P (1990) Industrial breeding and selection. In ‘Poultry breeding and genetics.’ (Ed. R Crawford) pp. 985–1028. (Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
Ibánẽz-Escriche N, Fernando RL, Toosi A, Dekkers JCM (2009) Genomic selection of purebreds for crossbred performance. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 41, 12
| Genomic selection of purebreds for crossbred performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19284703PubMed |
Jiang J, Shen B, O’Connell JR, VanRaden PM, Cole JB, Ma L (2017) Dissection of additive, dominance, and imprinting effects for production and reproduction traits in Holstein cattle. BMC Genomics 18, 425
| Dissection of additive, dominance, and imprinting effects for production and reproduction traits in Holstein cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28558656PubMed |
Johnson LA, Bartlett JW, Copeland L (1940) A study of nicking in Jersey cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 23, 709–718.
| A study of nicking in Jersey cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Keeratinijakal V, Lamkey KR (1993) Responses to reciprocal recurrent selection in BSSS and BSCB1 maize populations. Crop Science 33, 73–77.
| Responses to reciprocal recurrent selection in BSSS and BSCB1 maize populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kinghorn BP, Hickey JM, Van Der Werf JHJ (2010) Reciprocal recurrent genomic selection for total genetic merit in crossbred individuals. In ‘Proceedings of the 9th world congress on genetics applied to livestock production’. Species breeding: pig breeding – lecture sessions. p. 0036 (World Congress for Genetics Applied to Livestock Production: Leipzig, Germany)
Li Y, Hawken R, Sapp R, George A, Lehnert SA, Henshall JM, Reverter A (2017) Evaluation of non-additive genetic variation in feed-related traits of broiler chickens. Poultry Science 96, 754–763.
| Evaluation of non-additive genetic variation in feed-related traits of broiler chickens.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27647931PubMed |
Lo LL, Fernando RL, Grossman M (1993) Covariance between relatives in multibreed populations: additive model. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 87, 423–430.
| Covariance between relatives in multibreed populations: additive model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24190314PubMed |
Long CR (1980) Crossbreeding for beef production: experimental results. Journal of Animal Science 51, 1197–1223.
| Crossbreeding for beef production: experimental results.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lopes MS, Bovenhuis H, Hidalgo AM, Arendonk JAM, Knol EF, Bastiaansen JWM (2017) Genomic selection for crossbred performance accounting for breed-specific effects. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 49, 51
| Genomic selection for crossbred performance accounting for breed-specific effects.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28651536PubMed |
Lu D, Sargolzaei M, Kelly M, Li C, Vander Voort G, Wang Z, Plastow G, Moore S, Miller S (2012) Linkage disequilibrium in Angus, Charolais, and Crossbred beef cattle. Frontiers in Genetics 3, 152
| Linkage disequilibrium in Angus, Charolais, and Crossbred beef cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22912646PubMed |
Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2001) Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157, 1819–1829.
| Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meyer K (1989) Restricted maximum likelihood to estimate variance components for animal models with several random effects using a derivative-free algorithm. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 21, 317
| Restricted maximum likelihood to estimate variance components for animal models with several random effects using a derivative-free algorithm.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Miglior F, Burnside EB, Kennedy BW (1995) Production traits of Holstein cattle: estimation of nonadditive genetic variance components and inbreeding depression. Journal of Dairy Science 78, 1174–1180.
| Production traits of Holstein cattle: estimation of nonadditive genetic variance components and inbreeding depression.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 7622728PubMed |
Moghaddar N, Swan AA, Van Der Werf JH (2014) Comparing genomic prediction accuracy from purebred, crossbred and combined purebred and crossbred reference populations in sheep. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 46, 58
| Comparing genomic prediction accuracy from purebred, crossbred and combined purebred and crossbred reference populations in sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25927315PubMed |
Moll RH, Jackson WA, Mikkelsen RL (1994) Recurrent selection for maize grain yield: dry matter and nitrogen accumulation and partitioning changes. Crop Science 34, 874–881.
| Recurrent selection for maize grain yield: dry matter and nitrogen accumulation and partitioning changes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mühleisen J, Maurer HP, Stiewe G, Bury P, Reif JC (2013) Hybrid breeding in barley. Crop Science 53, 819–824.
| Hybrid breeding in barley.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Newman S, Reverter A, Johnston DJ (2002) Purebred–crossbred performance and genetic evaluation of postweaning growth and carcass traits in Bos indicus × Bos taurus crosses in Australia. Journal of Animal Science 80, 1801–1808.
| Purebred–crossbred performance and genetic evaluation of postweaning growth and carcass traits in Bos indicus × Bos taurus crosses in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12162647PubMed |
Olson K, VanRaden P, Tooker M (2012) Multibreed genomic evaluations using purebred Holsteins, Jerseys, and Brown Swiss. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 5378–5383.
| Multibreed genomic evaluations using purebred Holsteins, Jerseys, and Brown Swiss.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22916944PubMed |
Oyama K (2011) Genetic variability of Wagyu cattle estimated by statistical approaches. Animal Science Journal 82, 367–373.
| Genetic variability of Wagyu cattle estimated by statistical approaches.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21615828PubMed |
Palucci V, Schaeffer LR, Miglior F, Osborne V (2007) Non-additive genetic effects for fertility traits in Canadian Holstein cattle. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 39, 181
| Non-additive genetic effects for fertility traits in Canadian Holstein cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17306200PubMed |
Parnell P (2015) Has the beef genetic improvement pipline been effective? Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics. 21, 221–224.
Penny LH, Eberhart SA (1971) Twenty years of reciprocal recurrent selection with two synthetic varieties of maize (Zea mays L.). Crop Science 11, 900–903.
| Twenty years of reciprocal recurrent selection with two synthetic varieties of maize (Zea mays L.).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pitchford WS, Popplewell GI, Terle R (2017) Use of genomic selection in a tropically adapted composite beef program. In ‘22nd Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics’. pp. 179–182. (Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics: Armidale, NSW, Australia)
Porto-Neto LR, Kijas JW, Reverter A (2014) The extent of linkage disequilibrium in beef cattle breeds using high-density SNP genotypes. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 46, 22
| The extent of linkage disequilibrium in beef cattle breeds using high-density SNP genotypes.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24661366PubMed |
Reif JC, Gumpert F-M, Fischer S, Melchinger AE (2007) Impact of interpopulation divergence on additive and dominance variance in hybrid populations. Genetics 176, 1931–1934.
| Impact of interpopulation divergence on additive and dominance variance in hybrid populations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17507673PubMed |
Rodríguez-Almeida FA, Van Vleck LD, Willham RL, Northcutt SL (1995) Estimation of non-additive genetic variances in three synthetic lines of beef cattle using an animal model. Journal of Animal Science 73, 1002–1011.
| Estimation of non-additive genetic variances in three synthetic lines of beef cattle using an animal model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 7628942PubMed |
Saadeh HK, Craig JV, Smith LT, Wearden S (1968) Effectiveness of Alternative Breeding Systems for Increasing Rate of Egg Production in Chickens. Poultry Science 47, 1057–1072.
| Effectiveness of Alternative Breeding Systems for Increasing Rate of Egg Production in Chickens.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 5725349PubMed |
Seath DM, Lush JL (1940) Nicking in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 23, 103–113.
| Nicking in dairy cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shull GH (1908) The composition of a field of maize. American Breeders Association Report 4, 296–301.
| The composition of a field of maize.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sprague GF, Tatum LA (1942) General vs. specific combining ability in single crosses of corn. Agronomy Journal 34, 923–932.
| General vs. specific combining ability in single crosses of corn.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Su G, Christensen OF, Ostersen T, Henryon M, Lund MS (2012) Estimating additive and non-additive genetic variances and predicting genetic merits using genome-wide dense single nucleotide polymorphism markers. PLoS One 7, e45293
| Estimating additive and non-additive genetic variances and predicting genetic merits using genome-wide dense single nucleotide polymorphism markers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23056402PubMed |
Sun C, VanRaden PM, Cole JB, O’Connell JR (2014) Improvement of prediction ability for genomic selection of dairy cattle by including dominance effects. PLoS One 9, e103934
| Improvement of prediction ability for genomic selection of dairy cattle by including dominance effects.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25532034PubMed |
Tempelman R, Burnside E (1989) ‘Is nicking important in mating dairy cattle?’ Available at http://cgil.uoguelph.ca/pub/articles/nicking.html [Verified 25 February 2021]
van der Werf JHJ, De Boer W (1989) Influence of nonadditive effects on estimation of genetic parameters in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 2606–2614.
| Influence of nonadditive effects on estimation of genetic parameters in dairy cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
VanRaden PM (2008) Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 4414–4423.
| Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18946147PubMed |
Virmani SS, Edwards IB (1983) Current status and future prospects for breeding hybrid rice and wheat. Advances in Agronomy 36, 145–214.
| Current status and future prospects for breeding hybrid rice and wheat.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vitezica ZG, Varona L, Elsen J-M, Misztal I, Herring W, Legarra A (2016) Genomic BLUP including additive and dominant variation in purebreds and F1 crossbreds, with an application in pigs. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 48, 6
| Genomic BLUP including additive and dominant variation in purebreds and F1 crossbreds, with an application in pigs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26825279PubMed |
Wei M, Van der Steen HAM (1991) Comparison of reciprocal recurrent selection with pure-line selection systems in animal breeding (a review). Animal Breeding Abstracts 59, 281–298.
Xiang T, Christensen OF, Vitezica ZG, Legarra A (2016) Genomic evaluation by including dominance effects and inbreeding depression for purebred and crossbred performance with an application in pigs. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 48, 92
| Genomic evaluation by including dominance effects and inbreeding depression for purebred and crossbred performance with an application in pigs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 27887565PubMed |
Zeng J, Toosi A, Fernando RL, Dekkers JC, Garrick DJ (2013) Genomic selection of purebred animals for crossbred performance in the presence of dominant gene action. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 45, 11
| Genomic selection of purebred animals for crossbred performance in the presence of dominant gene action.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 23621868PubMed |
Zhao Y, Zeng J, Fernando R, Reif JC (2013) Genomic prediction of hybrid wheat performance. Crop Science 53, 802–810.
| Genomic prediction of hybrid wheat performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
