Reproductive Technology and Genetic Evaluation

  • B. W. Kennedy
  • L. R. Schaeffer
Part of the Advanced Series in Agricultural Sciences book series (AGRICULTURAL, volume 18)


The effects of use of embryo transfer and embryo splitting, and potential applications of embryo and semen sexing, chimeric and polyploid animals and gene transfer on genetic evaluation of dairy cattle are considered. Procedures for joint cow and bull evaluation under an animal model to accommodate embryo transfer in the population are reviewed. Genetic evaluation models based on data involving animals of identical genotype, as created through embryo splitting or other forms of cloning, are proposed. Approaches to genetic evaluation for traits influenced by both transgenes and polygenes are also suggested. Evaluation of cytoplasmic effects in embryo transfer programs is considered, and of dominance effects in populations where considerable use is made of embryo transfer and splitting. Problems of preferential treatment of genotypes produced through expensive reproductive technology are addressed.


Embryo Transfer Dairy Cattle Dominance Effect Genetic Evaluation Well Linear Unbiased Predictor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AnscombeFJ(1960) Rejection of outliers. Technometrics 2:123–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker RD, Shea BF (1985) Commercial splitting of bovine embryos. Theriogenology 23:3– 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bell BR, McDaniel BT, Robison OW (1985) Effects of cytoplasmic inheritance on production traits of dairy cattle. J Dairy Sei 68:2038–2051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benyshek L, Bertrand K, Johnson M, Little D (1986) Angus sire evaluation the 1986 edition. Angus J, Oct. pp 116–118Google Scholar
  5. Betteridge KJ, Hare WCD, Singh EL (1981) Approaches to sex selection in farm animals. In: Brackett BG, Seidel GE Jr, Seidel SM (eds) New technologies in animal breeding. Academic Press, New York, pp 109–125Google Scholar
  6. Brown WM, George M Jr, Wilson AC (1979) Rapid evolution of animal mitochondrial DNA. Proc Nat Acad Sei, USA 76:1967–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Church RB, McRae A, MeWhir J (1986) Embryo manipulation and gene transfer in livestock production. In: Dickerson GE, Johnson RK (eds) Proc 3rd World Congr Genet Appl Livest Prod, Agri Commun, Univ Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska XII: 133–138Google Scholar
  8. Crow JF, Roberts WC (1950) Inbreeding and homozygosis in bees. Genetics 35:612–621PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Day NE (1969) Estimating the components of a mixture of normal distributions. Biometrika 56:463–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dempfle L (1982) Problems in estimation of breeding values. Proc 2nd World Congr Genet Appl Livest Prod. Garsi, Madrid V:104–118Google Scholar
  11. ElstonRC, Stewart J (1971) A general model for the genetic analysis of pedigree data. Hum Hered 21:523–542PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Everett RW (1984) Impact of genetic manipulation. J Dairy Sei 67:2812–2818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Falconer DS (1981) Introduction to quantitative genetics. 2nd edn. Longman, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Famula TR (1986) Identifying single genes of large effect in quantitative traits using best linear unbiased prediction. J Anim Sei 63:68–76Google Scholar
  15. Fechheimer NS (1985) Prospects for genetic engineering in domestic animals. In: Chapman AB (ed) General and quantitative genetics. World Anim Sei A4, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 385–398Google Scholar
  16. Foulley JL, Gianola D (1986) Sire evaluation for multiple binary responses when information is missing on some traits. J Dairy Sei 69:2681–2695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gardner RL (1978) Production of chimeras by injecting cells or tissue into the blastocyst In: Daniel JC Jr (ed) Methods in mammalian reproduction. Academic Press, New York, pp 137–165Google Scholar
  18. Geldermann H, Pieper U, Weber EW (1986) Effect of misidentifcation on the estimation of breeding value and heritability in cattle. J Anim Sei 63:1759–1768Google Scholar
  19. Gianola D, Foulley JL (1983) Sire evaluation for ordered categorical data with a threshold model. Genet Sei Evol 15:201–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gilmour AR, Anderson RD, Rae AL (1985) The analysis of binomial data by a generalized linear mixed model. Biometrika 72:593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harville DA, Mee RW (1984) A mixed model procedure for analyzing ordered categorical data. Biometrics 40:393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henderson CR (1963) Selection index and expected genetic advance. In: Hanson WD, Robinson WR (eds) Statistical genetics and plant breeding. National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, Publication 982:141–163.Google Scholar
  23. Henderson CR (1966) A sire evaluation method which accounts for unknown genetic and environmental trends, herd differences, season, age effects and differential culling. Proc Symp Estimating Breeding Values of Dairy Sires and Cows, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Henderson CR (1973) Sire evaluation and genetic trends. In: Proc Anim Breed Genet Symp in Honor of Dr. J.L. Lush. ASAS and ADSA, Champaign, Illinois, pp 10–41Google Scholar
  25. Henderson CR (1975) Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31:423–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Henderson CR (1976) A simple method for computing the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in prediction of breeding values. Biometrics 32:69–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Henderson CR (1984) Applications of linear models in animal breeding. Univ Guelph Press, Guelph, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  28. Henderson CR, Carter HW, Godfrey JT (1954) Use of contemporary herd average in appraising progeny tests of dairy bulls. J Anim Sei (Abstr) 14:949Google Scholar
  29. Hudson GFS, Kennedy BW (1985) Genetic evaluation of swine for growth rate and backfat thickness. J Anim Sei 61:83–91Google Scholar
  30. Jansen GB, Wilton JW (1985) Selecting mating pairs with linear programming techniques. J Dairy Sei 68:1302–1305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kennedy BW (1986) A further look at evidence for cytoplasmic inheritance of production traits in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sei 69:3100–3111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kennedy BW, Moxley JE (1975) Comparison of genetic group and relationship methods for mixed model sire evaluation. J Dairy Sei 58:1507–1514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kinghorn BP (1983) A review of quantitative genetics in fish breeding. Aquaculture 31:283– 304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McLaren A (1984) Methods and success of nuclear transplantation in mammals. Nature 309:671–672PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meyer K, Burnside EB (1988) Joint sire and cow evaluation for conformation traits using an individual animal model. J Dairy Sei 71:1034–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. MintzB(1971) Allophenic mice of multi-embryo origin. In: Daniel JC Jr, (ed) Methods in mammalian embryology. Freeman WH, San Francisco, pp 184–214Google Scholar
  37. Morton NE, MacLeanCJ( 1974) Analysis of family resemblance. HI. Complex segregation of quantitative traits. Am J Hum Genet 26:489–503.Google Scholar
  38. Nicholas FW, Smith C (1983) Increased rates of genetic change in dairy cattle by embryo transfer and splitting. Anim Prod 36:341–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pearson K (1894) Contributions to the mathematical theory of evolution. Phil Trans R Soc 185:71–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Polge C (1986) Current and potential reproductive technology. In: Dickerson GE, Johnson RK (eds) Proc 3rd World Congr Genet Appl Livest Prod, Agric Commun, Univ Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska Xü:81–85Google Scholar
  41. Pollak EJ, Quaas RL (1983) Definition of group effects in sire evaluation models. J Dairy Sei 66:1503–1509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Powell RL (1981) Possible effects of embryo transfer on evaluation of cows and bulls. J Dairy Sei 64:2476–2483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Quaas RL (1976) Computing the diagonal elements and inverse of a large numerator relationship matrix. Biometrics 32:949–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Quaas RL, Pollak EJ (1980) Mixed model methodology for farm and ranch beef cattle testing programs. J Anim Sei 51:1277–1287Google Scholar
  45. Quaas RL, Everett RW, McClintock AE (1979) Maternal grandsire model for dairy sire evaluation. J Dairy Sei 62:1648–1654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Robertson A, Rendel JM (1954) The performance of heifers got by artificial insemination. J Agric Sei 44:184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schaeffer LR, Kennedy BW (1986a) Computing strategies for solving mixed model equations. J Dairy Sei 69:575–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schaeffer LR, Kennedy BW (1986b) Computing solutions to mixed model equations. In: Dickerson GE, Johnson RK (eds) Proc 3rd World Congr Genet Appl Livest Prod, Agric Commun, Univ Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska Xü:382–393Google Scholar
  49. Seidel GE Jr (1981) Superovulation and embryo transfer in cattle. Science 211:351–358PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Seidel GE Jr (1984) Applications of embryo transfer and related technologies to cattle. J Dairy Sei 67:2786–2796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Smith C, Meuwissen THE, Gibson JP (1987) On the use of transgenes in livestock improvement. Anim Breed Abstr 55:1–10Google Scholar
  52. Smith SP (1984) Dominance relationship matrix and inverse for an inbred population. Unpublished mimeo, Dept Dairy Sei, Ohio State Univ, Columbus, OhioGoogle Scholar
  53. Smith SP, Allaire FR (1985) Efficient selection rules to increase non-linear merit: application in mate selection. Genet Sei Evol 17:387–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sorensen DA, Kennedy BW (1983) The use of the relationship matrix to account for genetic drift variance in the analysis of genetic experiments. Theor Appl Genet 66:217–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sorensen DA, Kennedy BW (1984a) Estimation of response to selection using least-squares and mixed model methodology. J Anim Sei 58:1097–1106Google Scholar
  56. Sorensen DA, Kennedy BW (1984b) Estimation of genetic variances from unselected and selected populations. J Anim Sei 59:1213–1223Google Scholar
  57. Sorensen DA, Kennedy BW (1986) Analysis of selection experiments using mixed model methodology. J Anim Sei, 68:245–258Google Scholar
  58. Surani MAH, Barton SC, Norris ML (1987) Experimental reconstruction of mouse eggs and embryos: an analysis of mammalian development. Biol Reprod 36:1–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Thompson R (1979) Sire evaluation. Biometrics 35:339–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Upholt WB, David IB (1977) Mapping of mitochondrial DNA of individual sheep and goats: Rapid evolution in the D loop region. Cell 11:571–583PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Van Raden PM, Freeman AE (1985) Potential gains from producing bulls with only sires as parents. J Dairy Sei 68:1425–1431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van Vleck LD (1981) Potential genetic impact of artificial insemination, sex selection, embryo transfer, cloning, and selfing in dairy cattle. In: Brackett BG, Seidel GE Jr, Seidel SM (eds) New technologies in animal breeding. Academic Press, New York, pp 221–242Google Scholar
  63. Westell RA, Van Vleck LD (1984) Simultaneous genetic evaluation of sires and cows under an animal model. J Anim Sei 59, suppl l(Abstr.):175Google Scholar
  64. Wright S (1922) Coefficients of inbreeding and relationship. Am Nat 56:330–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. W. Kennedy
  • L. R. Schaeffer
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Genetic Improvement of LivestockUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations