Genomic analysis of purebred and crossbred Angus cattle demonstrates opportunity for multi-breed evaluation
W. S. Pitchford
A B , J. M. Pitchford A , R. A. McEwin A and R. Tearle A
A Davies Livestock Research Centre, School of Animal & Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: Wayne.Pitchford@adelaide.edu.au
Animal Production Science - https://doi.org/10.1071/AN21171
Submitted: 26 March 2021 Accepted: 2 June 2021 Published online: 16 September 2021
Abstract
Context: Overseas studies have quantified production differences of Hereford Angus crossbreds compared with purebred Angus for a range of traits including growth, carcass and reproductive traits.
Aim: This study aimed to quantify breed and heterosis effects using genomics.
Methods: Thirty Hereford and 30 Angus sires were mated to 1100 Angus cows and heifers in a large commercial herd run on pasture at Musselroe Bay, Tasmania. Approximately 1650 calves were born. Steers (743) were grown for an average of 23 months and then slaughtered.
Results: Heterozygosity effects were significant for birth, weaning and carcass weight and also loin eye-muscle area. On average, higher-quality (percentile) Hereford than Angus bulls were used. Breeding values were calculated for sires and could be compared with a common base given they also had BREEDPLAN breeding values published.
Conclusions: When heterozygosity was accounted for and when compared on a common base, progeny of average Angus sires were superior to progeny of Hereford sires for birthweight, carcass weight, eye-muscle area and intramuscular fat.
Implications: The method of benchmarking breeds using crossbred cattle and genomics provides a model for rapid adoption of multi-breed estimated breeding values, which is desirable for commercial beef producers.
Keywords: beef, crossbreeding, genomics.
References
Angus Australia (2020) Trans Tasman Angus cattle evaluation – May 2020 reference tables. Available at https://angus.tech/enquiry/animal/ebv-percs [Verified 19 January 2021]Butler DG, Cullis BR, Gilmour AR, Gogel BJ, Thompson R (2018) ASReml-R Reference Manual Version 4. Available at https://asreml.kb.vsni.co.uk/knowledge-base/asreml_r_documentation/ [Verified January 2019]
Cundiff LV, Gregory KE, Koch RM (1974a) Effects of heterosis on reproduction in Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn cattle Journal of Animal Science 38, 711–727.
| Effects of heterosis on reproduction in Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn cattleCrossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 4823182PubMed |
Cundiff LV, Gregory KE, Schwulst FJ, Koch RM (1974b) Effects of heterosis on maternal performance and milk production in Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn cattle Journal of Animal Science 38, 728–745.
| Effects of heterosis on maternal performance and milk production in Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn cattleCrossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 4823183PubMed |
Daley DA, Earley SP (2013) Harris Heterosis Report. Available at https://hereford.org/genetics/research/harris-heterosis-project/ [Verified 25 March 2014]
Graser H-U, Tier B, Johnston DJ, Barwick SA (2005) Genetic evaluation for the beef industry in Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 45, 913–921.
| Genetic evaluation for the beef industry in Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hebart ML, Lee SJ, Pitchford WS (2020) 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.
Herefords Australia (2020) Hereford percentile bands for 2018 born calves. Available at https://abri.une.edu.au/online/cgi-bin/i4.dll?1=2A2C3E293E&2=2323&3=56&5=2B3C2B3C3A [Verified 19 January 2021]
Koch RM, Dickerson GE, Cundiff LV, Gregory KE (1985) Heterosis retained in advanced generations of crosses among Angus and Hereford cattle Journal of Animal Science 60, 1117–1132.
| Heterosis retained in advanced generations of crosses among Angus and Hereford cattleCrossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 4008360PubMed |
Lohuis MMSmith C (1994 )
Pitchford WS, Deland MPB, Siebert BD, Malau-Aduli AEO, Bottema CDK (2002) Genetic variation in fatness and fatty acid composition Journal of Animal Science 80, 2825–2832.
| Genetic variation in fatness and fatty acid compositionCrossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 12462249PubMed |
Pitchford JM, Jones J, Hebart ML, Pitchford WS (2021) The use of Hereford sires over mature Angus dams can add value to Angus cattle herds. Animal Production Science
| The use of Hereford sires over mature Angus dams can add value to Angus cattle herds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Reverter A, Johnston DJ, Perry D, Goddard ME, Burrow HM (2003) Genetic and phenotypic characterisation of animal, carcass, and meat quality traits from temperate and tropically adapted beef breeds. 2. Abattoir carcass traits. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 54, 119–134.
| Genetic and phenotypic characterisation of animal, carcass, and meat quality traits from temperate and tropically adapted beef breeds. 2. Abattoir carcass traits.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sargolzaei M, Chesnais JP, Schenkel FS (2014) A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives. BMC Genomics 15, 478
| A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24935670PubMed |
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 |
Williams JL, Aguilar I, Rekaya R, Bertrand JK (2010) Estimation of breed and heterosis effects for growth and carcass traits in cattle using published crossbreeding studies. Journal of Animal Science 88, 460–466.
| Estimation of breed and heterosis effects for growth and carcass traits in cattle using published crossbreeding studies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19820043PubMed |
