Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) General Manager, Brian Van Doormaal, is pleased to announce the appointment of Mrs. Jamie Zimmerman as Coordinator of Data Exchange and Information Services, effective December 8, 2014.

In this position within the Information Services department of CDN, Jamie will be responsible for receiving, processing and validating all incoming data from industry partners as well as the distribution of outgoing data files to authorized organizations. She will also assist in providing services to CDN customers, especially in the area of data exchange and integrity as well as to thegrowing number of users of the CDN web site.

Jamie is not a stranger to the Canadian dairy cattle improvement industry and the data collected from herds across the country. From June 2011 to March 2014, she was employed by Holstein Canada. Working within the Herdbook and Genotyping department, she carried out various functions including entry and editing of herdbook registration applications, processing animal transfers and all activities associated with embryo exports internationally. More recently, she has been the Programs Assistant for the Growing Forward 2 Program at the Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association located in Guelph, Ontario.

“There is no doubt that Jamie’s past experience working in the dairy industry, combined with her enthusiasm and affable personality makes her a great fit for this role and we welcome her to the CDN team”, commented Brian Van Doormaal. He added, “It is important to also recognize the significant and loyal contribution of Mrs. Marilyn Halls, who has held this position for the past 17 years and will soon become the first retiree of CDN since its creation in 1995.”

Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) is the national genetic evaluation centre for dairy cattle and provides services to Canadian dairy producers and member organizations including breed associations, DHI agencies, A.I. organizations and Dairy Farmers of Canada. It also serves as the hub of the national Data Exchange System by which all dairy cattle improvement industry organizations share authorized data collected from dairy herds across the country.

The CDN web site serves as the primary source of genetic information for dairy cattle in Canada with over 23,000 unique users every month.

With over five years of genomics under our belts, it now seems like “old news.” Our tendency to question the relevance and accuracy has now diminished. Instead, we use genomic-proven bulls with great confidence as part of a balanced breeding program.
However, if you’re still uncertain of the stability on specific traits or looking for comparisons on genomic-proven versus daughter-proven options, read more for the answers you’re looking for.

Past Selection Decisions

Tables 1 and 2 show the top ten daughter-proven and top ten genomic-proven bulls available in August 2010 based on TPI. They are listed here with today’s TPI values. Based on these tables, you can clearly see that the August 2010 genomic sires are a superior group.

Comparison between daughter-proven and genomic-proven bulls in August 2010

Those who chose to use sires from the genomic-proven list in 2010 now have numerous milking daughters of these exciting, high-profile sires that are finishing their first or starting their second lactations. These herds are genetically ahead of those who chose to use daughter-proven bulls back in 2010.

More data means more stable 1st crop proofs

The graphs below show the expected change for different traits from a genomic to first crop proof. In total, 3085 bulls were genomic-tested in August 2010 and now have official daughter evaluations. Looking at the TPI graph, we see that of those 3085 bulls, more than 75 had zero change in TPI, and the average change of all bulls was just 71 TPI point decrease.

Meanwhile, only fifteen bulls in the entire breed either gained or lost more than 400 TPI points. This means you can be confident that a genomic bull you use now has only a 0.04% chance (15/3085) of dropping or gaining more than 400 TPI points by the time he gets a daughter proof.

Change in TPI from August 2010 Genomic proofs to August 2014 daughter proofs

Click any of the following graphs to see a larger version:

Current versus Historic GTPI

The graph to the right shows the trend of current TPI versus GTPI values from August 2010. The change from a genomic to 1st crop proof is now more stable than what we saw in the first years of genomics. This proves that the extra 35 daughter equivalents from genomics add significant proof stability. It is still important to note that many of the bulls that dropped more than expected in TPI from their genomic to 1st crop proofs tended to be among the highest-ranked genomic bulls.

This change certainly proves that using a group of genomic sires with pedigree diversity to match a farm’s customized genetic criteria is the best way to limit risks. Rather than focus on the single highest sire, create a customized genetic plan and utilize a group of sires that meet an individual herd’s genetic goals. The reliability gained from using a package of bulls provides the confidence and reassurance that genetic progress is being made in the right direction.

Graph to show the current GTPI of sires as compared to their GTPI in August 2010

Today’s Selection Decisions

Just as in August 2010, selection options today are much the same. You could use the best daughter-proven sires or Alta’s best genomic bulls (Tables 3 and 4). While the bulls on the proven list (Table 3) get a lot of publicity and have made some great daughters, the genetic predictions of the genomic group (Table 4) certainly exceed those of the daughter-proven group.

Using genomic-proven sires as part of a customized genetic plan will certainly maximize genetic progress within a herd. Limit risk by increasing the number of different sires used and by ensuring there is pedigree diversity within the group.

Comparison between top daughter-proven and top genomic-proven sires in August 2014

Keep this in mind…

There are a couple things to consider when seeing that the average bull dropped about 70 TPI points from his genomic prediction in 2010 to his daughter proof in August 2014:

1. The ranking stayed relatively consistent among sires, and the genomic sires still clearly outpaced daughter-proven sires.
2. The highest ranking bulls tend to have the largest decrease in TPI. The top 100 GTPI sires from August 2010 dropped an average of 200 TPI points from their genomic proof to their daughter proof, compared to the average of all bulls dropping just 70 TPI points.
3. There have been numerous improvements to the genomic model since 2010 that continue to adjust for any over-prediction in genomic proofs.
   • A large portion of the average TPI change is due to the previous overestimation for Productive Life. An adjustment for PL at the end of 2012 dropped the PL figure for all genomic-proven sires to account for the previous over inflation. The change shown in the PL histogram below is mostly accounted for within that model adjustment. While it’s not ideal to see bulls go down, the PL model change affected all bulls the same, and sire rankings stayed nearly constant.
   • As the graphs below also show, the average combined fat and protein (CFP) only changed by about 5 pounds from genomic proofs in August 2010 to daughter proofs in August 2014! That means those who chose to use genomic proven sires originally, are certainly realizing the benefits of the components for which they selected.
4. The model changes along the way force us to use caution as we compare current genomic proofs to future daughter proofs.

Analysis for this information done by Gerbrand Van Burgsteden. Email Gerbrand by clicking HERE.

To download a PDF of this information, please Click HERE.

Source: AltaGenetics

The Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) announced several significant changes for the Dec. 2, 2014 U.S. dairy cattle genetic evaluations. First, two additional fertility traits will be incorporated into lifetime merit indexes. Rather than using daughter pregnancy rate (DPR), the indexes will include heifer conception rate (HCR) and cow conception rate (CCR). CDCB Chief Executive Officer João Dürr explains that incorporating the new fertility traits should be a more direct use of age at first calving and decreased costs to obtain pregnancies, including reduced semen needs. The revised net merit index places more relative emphasis on milk component traits, compared to previous evaluations. Combined fat and protein yield will now receive 42%, compared to the previous 35%. Less emphasis will be given to somatic cell score, body size and productive life.

A new index – grazing merit (GM$) – will be added to the December 2014 genetic evaluations. GM$ is geared toward herds on pasture systems, with those breeders often demanding higher fertility, compared to conventional systems, due to seasonal calving requirements. CDCB will continue to publish the traditional indexes – net merit (NM$), cheese merit (CM$) and fluid merit (FM$).

In addition to the index updates, the December 2014 genetic evaluations incorporate a base change, which typically occurs about every five years. According to CDCB staff, the updated genetic base is simply an adjustment to the Predicted Transmitting Abilities (PTA) of all animals to compensate for the genetic change that has been made over the past five years and adjusting the base keeps PTAs from becoming extreme over time. Without the adjustment, users could lose sight that some genetics would not provide them the improvements they expect. Average PTAs in each breed for sire-identified cows born in 2010 will be set to zero, except for calving ease and stillbirth rate. Calving ease will be set at the breed average and somatic cell score will be set at 3.0.

Preliminary genomic predictions will now be calculated weekly, rather than just publishing official monthly evaluations. The weekly genomic predictions only include new genotyped animals and estimates of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) effects from the previous official evaluation. Also, reliabilities and genomic inbreeding will not be included in the preliminary genomic predictions. Earlier access to genomic evaluations benefits producers by enabling earlier culling decisions, and for genotyping laboratories, this fosters more uniform workloads.

More comprehensive descriptions of the merit indexes, preliminary genomic predictions and base change are available at https://www.cdcb.us/News/News.htm.

CDCB conducts genetic evaluations for economically important traits of dairy cattle. The CDCB allied partners cooperator database is the largest in the world, which is devoted to dairy animals, with more than 120 million female phenotypic records and more than 480,000 males receiving genetic evaluations or genomic predictions.

Genomics has sped up genetic progress, but has it impacted inbreeding? Did genomics allow for a larger pool of bulls available for selection? We answer these questions in our current extension article.
The information presented in Table 1 reveals bull numbers pre- and post-genomics on a global scale and in North America. In addition, it shows the number of bulls pre-screened with genotyping and the number of those that went on to enter A.I.

Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) has been providing official genomic evaluations since 2009, which have become a very important tool for genetic selection decisions in Canada. A recent analysis carried out by CDN shows that genomic young bulls represented nearly 57% of the A.I. market share in the first half of 2014 while progeny proven sires took up the remaining 43%. As is the case with young bulls worldwide, genomic evaluations for young bulls have historically experienced some degree of overestimation. CDN is committed to providing the most accurate genomic evaluations possible and its geneticists have been actively developing methods to remove sources of bias in traditional genetic evaluations that lead to overestimation of genomics so producers can continue to have confidence in the Canadian genetic evaluation system. Recent changes that have now been officially implemented to reduce bias are described in this article.

Non-Random Usage of Highly Ranked Genomic Young Bulls

An increasing trend in the marketplace is that the first availability of semen from highly ranked genomic young bulls is reserved for special matings to elite females and/or sold at very high prices. Following a given time period, additional semen becomes more broadly available at a cost more common to elite genomic young bulls. Given the lower levels of semen production for very young genomic bulls compared to older bulls, this strategy makes some sense and is advantageous from a genetic improvement and marketing perspective. From a genetic evaluation viewpoint, however, it can easily lead to bias in the subsequent progeny proof of
those sires. The non-random usage of a sire, both in terms of the genetic quality of the cows bred and the management level of the herds, needs to be accurately considered in the genetic evaluation system. In addition, the offspring resulting from such matings are generally very well cared for since they represent such a large investment. Again, this makes perfect sense in terms of herd management. However, from a genetic evaluation standpoint this creates a major challenge since the first group of each sire’s daughters in lactation and type classified would not be a representative group with equal management compared to other heifers in the calf pen or after calving.

To address non-random treatment given to the first daughters resulting when highly ranked genomic young bulls have limited semen access due to availability and/or high price, CDN geneticists sought to find a measure that indicates which bulls may be affected. Through their research, they discovered that the best indicator was the percentage of milk recorded daughters resulting from embryo transfer (%ET) in a bull’s progeny proof.

When geneticists analyzed the impact of the %ET daughters on bull proofs, there was no impact found for bulls that had less than 30% of their daughters from ET. For sire’s with more than 30% ET daughters, CDN introduced an adjustment in April 2014 to reduce the expected overestimation of traditional progeny proofs prior to the addition of genomics. Specifically, for every 1% increase in ET daughters, the sire’s traditional proof is reduced by 5.5 kg for Milk, 0.38 kg for Fat, 0.18 kg for Protein and 0.05 points for each of Conformation, Mammary System, Feet and Legs, Dairy Strength and Rump. Together, this accumulates to an adjustment of approximately 5 LPI points for each percentage ET daughters higher than 30%, as shown in Figure 1. The adjustment will typically be highest for the bull’s first proof since the percentage ET will also be highest among his first calving daughters and it will generally reduce over time as more daughters calve and contribute to the sire’s proof. As shown in Figure 1, the maximum possible adjustment, for a sire with 100% ET daughters, is a total of -359 LPI points. Although relatively few bulls are currently affected by this new adjustment, it is expected to happen more often in the years to come as elite genomic young bulls become progeny proven. This adjustment to traditional progeny proofs serves to improve the input for calculating genomic evaluations, especially of the sons and daughters of the affected sires.

Improving the Accuracy of Cow Evaluations

Geneticists also researched methods to reduce bias in cow evaluations in an effort to improve their accuracy, as well as the accuracy of the Parent Averages of their sons and daughters.  Preferential treatment of cows can lead to cow evaluations being far higher than what would be expect based on the animal’s pedigree index, which is simply defined as the sire stack of the maternal line (1/2 Sire + 1/4 MGS +1/8 Great MGS, etc).

The difference between cow evaluations and their pedigree index is expected to follow a “normal”, bell-curve distribution. In reality, CDN geneticists found the presence of some cows that were significant outliers based on the expected distribution. As of August 2014, an adjustment was implemented to ensure the expected bell-curve distribution in the Holstein, Ayrshire, Jersey and Brown Swiss breeds. This methodology was used for the production and type traits as well as somatic cell score, which ultimately gets reflected in the LPI for each cow. Figure 2 shows the impact of this adjustment in Holsteins depending on their LPI before  including any genomic information. As can be seen, there are several cows with an LPI over 2000 that receive an adjustment ranging between -200 and -450 points. These cows most likely received a degree of preferential treatment and therefore received a traditional genetic evaluation for various traits that was too high compared to their pedigree index. Although to a lesser degree, some cows below 1200 LPI also received an adjustment over 200 LPI points but in an upward direction.

In practise, after the traditional cow evaluations are adjusted for this bias, they are combined with the Direct Genomic Value (DGV) for genotyped cows, which are already unbiased estimates of the cow’s genetic merit that is independent of any possible preferential treatment. For this reason, the impact of this new adjustment on published cow evaluations differs for genotyped versus non-genotyped cows. Figure 3 shows the change in published LPI (or GLPI) from April to August 2014 for non-genotyped (versus genotyped) Holsteins that were at least 3000 LPI/GLPI in April. As seen in the graph, a handful of non-genotyped cows experienced a decrease that exceeded 200 LPI points but the majority of cows were impacted by ±150 LPI points.

Summary

Two new adjustments for bias have now been implemented by CDN, resulting in more accurate genetic and genomic evaluations for Canadian dairy producers. For bulls, an adjustment based on the percentage of daughters resulting from embryo transfer targets sires that were not randomly used in Canada and the expected preferential treatment of their daughters. Improving the accuracy of progeny proofs for these bulls has an important impact on reducing bias in genomic evaluations of their sons and daughters. For cows, the new methodology reduces the impact of preferential treatment on their resulting genetic evaluations, which also improves the accuracy of Parent Averages of their sons and daughters.

Authors: Lynsay Beavers and Brian Van Doormaal
Date: August 2014

The Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) has released a breakdown on the Average Gain in LPI Reliability due to Genomics after the 2014 August Proof Run.

Source: CDN

“I just manage for those things”, or “It takes too long to improve those traits,” or “Selecting for those traits won’t lead to any real difference in my herd”. Have any of these thoughts crossed your mind when considering low heritability traits? We often encounter comments such as these and would like to set the record straight – selection for low heritability traits does make a difference in female performance and will affect your bottom line.

Heritability – The Highs and Lows

Simply put, heritability is the amount of total variation for a trait in a population that can be attributed to genetics. For example, the heritability of protein yield is high at 40%. Imagine two cows in two different herds that each have a different protein yield. Around 40% of the difference in their protein yields can be explained by genetics and the other 60% of the difference is due to herd management and environment. Protein yield is a win-win trait – it is of high economic importance and also has a moderately high heritability.

Similar to protein yield, traits associated with health, fertility and longevity are of great economic importance. However, unlike yield traits, these traits are lowly heritable because they are complex, making them difficult to define, record and evaluate. Traits with a heritability below 15% (Table 1) are, therefore, strongly influenced by environmental effects and require attention in terms of herd management in order to reach optimal levels.
Take Daughter Fertility, for instance, which has a heritability of 7%. On average, 93% of all factors influencing a given cow’s reproductive performance are non-genetic. Since environment and herd management are so impactful when it comes to Daughter Fertility, does this mean it should only be managed for and ignored genetically? Absolutely not! While heritability tells us how closely genetic merit follows phenotypic performance, it tells us nothing about the economic value of better performance.

Selection for Low Heritability Traits Makes a Difference

To show that selection for low heritability traits can result in improvement, Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) examined the performance of daughters of the five highest and lowest sires for Daughter Fertility and Herd Life that had over 1000 daughters in their proofs. It’s important to note that these aren’t sires that just happened to be good for the traits we’re interested in, these are progeny proven sires that were returned to active service, most likely based on their LPI, and became popular for various reasons and heavily used in Canada.

Table 1 shows the average daughter performance for sires that excel or are poor for Herd Life based on actual survival data for at least 1000 daughters. The top five sires averaged 109 for Herd Life, while the bottom five sires averaged 93 (breed average is 100). Daughters of the top five sires for Herd Life had a greater average number of calvings, a longer productive life, and had higher survival rates to later lactations compared to daughters of the bottom five sires. This is especially evident when looking at the survival rates to 3rd and 4th calving, where sires that excel for Herd Life had approximately 20% more daughters still alive to start their 3rd and 4th lactation relative to sires that were poor for Herd Life. For a producer, this translates into more profitability and the option to have fewer herd replacements.

Table 1: Average Daughter Performance for the Top 5 and Bottom 5 Sires for Herd Life with Greater than 1000 Daughters

Table 2 shows the average daughter performance for sires that are high end or inferior for Daughter Fertility based on actual reproductive data for at least 1000 daughters. The top 5 sires had a proof that averaged 19 points higher for Daughter Fertility than the bottom 5 sires. Milking daughters of top sires required 13% fewer inseminations per conception and averaged 10 fewer days open. Research suggests the cost of each extra day open is approximately $4. Based on this estimate, the genetic disadvantages alone of a daughter of a bottom end sire for Daughter Fertility translates to an opportunity cost of $40 per female.

Table 2: Average Daughter Performance for the Top 5 and Bottom 5 Sires for Daughter Fertility with Greater than 1000 Daughters

Daughters of the sires in the two examples above are found across Canada, in a wide variety of management systems and environments. The performance differences seen between the top and bottom groups can be attributed exclusively to genetics. Despite the low heritability of Herd Life and Daughter Fertility, using sires that excelled (or were poor) for these traits resulted in notable differences in daughter performance. These examples prove that low heritability traits can make a difference. Genetic evaluations for this category of traits help to identify the extreme sires on each end of the spectrum. When it comes to determining which traits are included in your breeding goals, turn to economic importance before heritability – your bottom line will thank you for it.

Authors: Lynsay Beavers and Brian Van Doormaal, Canadian Dairy Network
Date: July 2014

Mastitis – Mastitis – it’s a real game changer in terms of profitability at the farm level! It can turn a good cow into a poor one very quickly! In 2013, over 20% of cows removed by involuntary culling from Canadian dairy herds left due to problems with mastitis and/or high somatic cell count. Over the past several decades since somatic cell testing became a routine service offered by milk recording agencies across the country, great progress has been realized. Although herd management is very important for maintaining low levels of somatic cell count, genetic selection should also be used to improve mastitis resistance. Effective August 2014, Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) will publish official genetic evaluations for Mastitis Resistance, which combines both clinical and sub-clinical mastitis into a single genetic selection index.

HealthData

Following a coordinated industry effort involving CDN, milk recording agencies, breed associations, A.I. organizations and various veterinarian groups, a national system for collecting health events was implemented in 2007. Since that time, approximately 40% of all herds enrolled on milk recording are voluntarily recording the incidence of eight key diseases and reporting this data to their milk recording agency (or their DSA veterinarian in Quebec). This accumulation of data has led to the calculation of genetic evaluations for clinical mastitis.

ClinicalMastitisandSomaticCellCount

Somatic cell count (SCC) is a measure of sub-clinical mastitis that is easy to assess by laboratory analysis of each cow’s milk sample on test day. Due to the ease of recording this trait and its relative importance for herd and cow management, milk recording has offered somatic cell testing for decades as part of its portfolio of services. Now, with the additional collection of herd health events related to clinical mastitis, producers will have a tool to select directly for resistance to clinical mastitis as well as sub-clinical mastitis. Table 1 provides correlations among Holstein sire proofs for the various traits related to mastitis that CDN will be evaluating in
the Holstein, Ayrshire and Jersey breeds.

Mastitis Resistance is an overall index that equally combines evaluations for three other traits, namely Clinical Mastitis in first lactation cows, Clinical Mastitis for cows in later lactations and Somatic Cell Score evaluated across the first three lactations. The heritability of Mastitis Resistance is estimated at 12%, indicating that genetic selection is possible. Official sire proofs for Mastitis Resistance have a desirable correlation of 79% with current proofs for Somatic Cell Score as well as correlations of 85% and 90% respectively, for clinical mastitis in first versus later lactations. Of particular interest as well is the fact that Somatic Cell Score, as a measure of sub-clinical mastitis, has only a moderate desirable association with clinical mastitis in first and later lactations (44% and 58% respectively).

Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the association between sire proofs for Somatic Cell Score and the new Mastitis Resistance index, expressed as Relative Breeding Values with an average of 100 and 95% of bulls ranging between 115 (best) to 85 (worst). As suggested by the strong desirable correlation of 79%, the plot shows that many bulls already known to be good for low somatic cell counts in their daughters are also good for overall selection of Mastitis Resistance, including clinical mastitis. In fact, of those bulls that were at least one standard deviation better than average for Somatic Cell Score (i.e.: rating of 2.77 or lower), 98% of them are above breed average for Mastitis Resistance. Among those that were simply better than breed average for Somatic Cell Score (i.e.: below 3.00), 78% have a rating higher than the breed average of 100 for Mastitis Resistance. In other words, these bulls were better than average for Somatic Cell Score but below average for Mastitis Resistance. The availability of the new Mastitis Resistance evaluations allows for the improvement of both sub-clinical and clinical mastitis simultaneously.

InterpretationofMastitisResistance

To assist producers in understanding the expected response achievable in their herd when considering sire proofs for Mastitis Resistance, Table 2 provides a “translation” in terms of average daughter performance for both clinical mastitis and somatic cell count throughout the first three lactations.

When used in a typical herd with average herd management, an average bull with a rating of 100 for Mastitis Resistance is expected to produce daughters that will have somatic cell counts averaging 178,000, 226,000 and 292,000 in each of the first three lactations, respectively. In addition, 92% of the daughters in first lactation are not expected to have clinical mastitis and this percentage decreases slightly to 88% for later lactations. Bulls that are better than breed average receive a Mastitis Resistance evaluation higher than 100 and are expected to produce daughters that are less susceptible to having both sub-clinical and clinical mastitis, as shown in
Table 2.

Summary

The August 2014 arrival of official genetic evaluations for Mastitis Resistance for the Holstein, Ayrshire and Jersey breeds provides dairy producers with an advanced tool for genetic selection against mastitis, simultaneously for both sub-clinical and clinical. Due to the larger number of progeny proven sires with an official Mastitis Resistance, the Holstein breed will also benefit from the calculation by CDN of genomic evaluations for this important trait. The publication of Mastitis Resistance will not replace the availability of genetic evaluations for Somatic Cell Score but dairy producers should move towards using this new index when making selection decisions to reduce the overall incidence of mastitis in their herd.

Authors: Brian Van Doormaal and Lynsay Beavers
Date: June 2014

The 2014 Interbull Meeting took place in the Estrel Hotel and Conference Center in Berlin, Germany, from May 19-21, as part of the 2014 ICAR/Interbull Conference. The Interbull Technical Committee (ITC) met earlier on Sunday, May 18, in an effort to properly cover the variety of issues on the agenda. On Monday, May 19, it was time for the Steering Committee to have its first encounter. On the following day the Interbull community gathered for the first Business Meeting, for the Interbull Open sessions on “Genetic evaluation methods” and “National and international genetic evaluations” and finally for the ICAR/Interbull joint technical session on “Parentage verification and parentage discovery. On the last day, two additional Open sessions, “National and international genomic evaluations” and “Breeding objectives and novel traits”, were followed by the second Business meeting and the second Steering Committee meeting, respectively. The Interbull meeting had 196 attendants from 39 countries and 32 scientific reports were presented in the Open sessions in addition to the four invited papers in the ICAR/Interbull joint session on parentage verification/discovery.

The German Cattle Breeders’ Federation (ADR) and the organizing committee did a splendid job planning all possible details and delivering a very pleasant meeting to all attendees and deserve our sincere gratitude. Big thanks go also to all sponsors that acknowledge the value of ICAR and Interbull for animal production worldwide.

A summary of the relevant information and Steering Committee decisions from the meetings in Berlin is presented below.

2013-2014 Interbull Centre activity report

During the first Business meeting the Interbull Centre director, João Dürr, presented the summary of activities at the center since the last annual meeting in Nantes (August 2013), covering personnel, service and operations, research and development, publications and work plans. The Interbull Centre finances and budgets are also included in the activity report and were presented at the same occasion by the Interbull Secretary, Erling Strandberg. The financial situation has improved significantly in comparison with previous years and also in relation to the budgeted results for 2013. Several factors contributed to the improvement, on both the income and the costs sides, resulting in an expected positive accumulated balance of approximately € 200,000, which is a level appropriate for the size of the operation. Finances and budgets were approved by the Steering Committee.

The Interbull Centre activity reports are available at http://www.interbull.org/ib/itbcreports.

Re-election of SC member

Sophie Mattalia’s term as a Steering Committee member ends this year, but she was re-nominated by France Génétique Elevage for a new period of 4 years. Both the Steering Committee and the representatives present at the Business meeting supported her re-nomination, which was sent to the ICAR board for approval.

GMACE official in August 2014

As advertised in the Steering Committee executive summary of February 11^th, 2014, (https://wiki.interbull.org/public/2014_2_ExecSum?action=print), the August 2014 GMACE run will be the first GMACE routine run unless major technical impediments happen to occur. Since no major technical concerns referring to neither the February 2014 GMACE test run or the April 2014 GMACE implementation runs were reported or raised by the ITC, the August 2014 will be the first GMACE official routine run offered by Interbull.

Bull controlling country

The Steering Committee established additional rules for the use of the bull controlling country list (File 734):

1. Each bull should have only one controlling country assigned
   1. When a bull has shared ownership, owners need to agree on which country to assign as the controlling country for the publication status of GMACE evaluations
   2. The Interbull Centre will try to resolve any conflicts by contacting the national genetic evaluation units as data providers and asking for a solution before a specified deadline
   3. If owners do not resolve conflicts, the regular publication policy applies, i.e. if one country reports a bull with an official GEBV, the GMACE evaluation for that bull will be distributed by Interbull for official publication
2. Bulls that previously held the status “Yes” for GMACE publication cannot be subsequently assigned a “No” status for GMACE publication.
3. If available, participating countries in GMACE should supply the NAAB stud number of the bull controller to be used as additional criteria to resolve conflicts (details of how this information should be supplied will be communicated by the Interbull Centre in due time).

In order to illustrate how the Interbull publication policy for genomically proven bulls should be interpreted, a decision tree is supplied in Appendix I.

Truncated MACE

The implementation of left truncated MACE runs to supply more adequate validation data for countries that use de-regressed MACE values as input to the national genomic evaluations was postponed to the January 2015 run in order to allow the technical details of the new procedure to be properly explained to and understood by the service users.

GENOEX

A topic that occupied significant time in the meetings was the International Genotype Exchange Platform (GENOEX) proposal, which was the object of discussions in a couple of Interbull sessions and also during other related ICAR working groups. A detailed description of the proposal can be found at Dürr, J., Jorjani, H., Reents, R. 2014. International Genotype Exchange Platform (GENOEX). Proc. ICAR/Interbull Conference, Berlin, Germany, May 19-23, 2014. 10 p. (International Genotype Exchange Platform_paper_Durr_v2.pdf). The services to be provided through the implementation of the GENOEX platform at the Interbull Centre are differentiated into three categories: (1) parentage SNP exchange service (PSE), (2) genomic data exchange service (GDE) and (3) customized genomic repository service (CGR). A step-wise implementation process will be adopted, starting by PSE followed by GDE and CGR. During the discussions it was emphasized that Interbull does not intend to provide parentage verification services and therefore compete with the organizations that currently offer such services in the different countries, but instead facilitate parentage data exchanges among those involved. After considering the inputs received during the meetings, the Steering Committee made the following decisions.

1. The Steering Committee will request financial support for the project from the ICAR board and the Interbull Centre will, in parallel, seek support from SLU.
2. Even if the decision on availability of external funds may take a while, the Interbull Centre should go ahead with the first phase of the GENOEX proposal (PSE) immediately, using the positive balance presented in the financial report. This will be possible because the budget for the PSE module is affordable with an estimate of € 40,000.
3. In order to guarantee that the business rules for the PSE service do not create conflicts with stakeholders which are not currently among the Interbull service users, a Task Force will be created including representatives of the SC (Sophie Mattalia and Brian Van Doormaal) and for the following ICAR groups:
   • Parentage recording working group
   • Genetic analysis working group
   • Breed associations task force

Service calendar

The Steering Committee approved a small adjustment in the service calendar for the April 2015 routine run due to a conflict with the Easter holidays. The deadline for data reception for GMACE (national GEBVs), previously scheduled for 2015/03/25 is now at 2015/03/24 and the GMACE pre-release date, instead of 2015/04/02 is now scheduled for 2015/04/01. These changes, although subtle, are believed to allow both the Interbull Centre and the national units to perform all analyses before the Easter holidays start. The Interbull service calendar is available at http://www.interbull.org/ib/servicecalendar.

Future meetings

At the second Business meeting, future events involving Interbull were presented to the audience including:

• The 2015 Interbull meeting will precede the 2015 ADSA®-ASAS Joint Annual Meeting,Orlando, Florida, USA, July 9 to 12, 2015.

• The EAAP/Interbull joint sessions during the 66^th EAAP Meeting in Warsaw, Poland, August 31 to September 4, 2015.

• The 2016 ICAR/Interbull Conference. Puerto Varas, Chile, October 24-28, 2016.

Issues Arising from the Interbull Technical Committee

Post-processing of correlations

The ITC started a review of the correlation post-processing procedures with special attention to two particular cases:

1. Pairs of countries with poor links (too few common bulls)
2. Pairs of countries with strong links but estimated correlations outside the pre-established windows

The same working group that has recommended the adoption of post-processing for conformation traits is now reactivated to conduct the proposed review (Raphael Mrode, Esa Mantysaari, Tom Lawlor and Hossein Jorjani). The current methodology applied by Interbull for correlation estimation and post-processing is described at https://wiki.interbull.org/public/rG%20procedure?action=print&rev=17.

Mendelian Sampling trend validation

Service users were requested to run a pilot study to test both the software and the methodology of the Mendelian Sampling trend validation developed in cooperation with MTT and NAV. The feedback received was that the instructions are straightforward and the program is easy to use. A preliminary summary of the results was presented in the Open meeting and now the working group (MTT, NAV, Interbull Centre) will perform more detailed analyses of the pilot data to assess the impact of adopting the procedure as part of the Interbull routine validations.

Genomic reliabilities

The working group formed by Bevin Harris (chair), Vincent Ducrocq, Mario Calus, Paul VanRaden, Zengting Liu and Martin Lidauer presented a promising progress report of testing a “naïve” method of approximating genomic reliabilities based on Harris & Johnson (1998). The next steps for this important project are: complete the data simulation step including pre-selection, address the gap between validation accuracy and estimated reliabilities and use true values from simulated data to verify the validation accuracy.

GEBV test

The original working group (Esa Mäntysaari, Paul VanRaden and Zengting Liu) and Mohammad Nilforooshan will review some aspects of the GEBV validation test: upper limit for cases in which b1 > E(b1), minimum number of test bulls and comparison of EBVs and GEBVs for bulls in different strata of the ranks.

Appendix I

Decision tree to interpret the Interbull publication guidelines for genomically proven bulls.

The Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB) has hired João Walter Dürr of Uppsala, Sweden, as its chief executive officer. Dürr, who will be relocating to the Beltsville, Md. area, brings a wealth of managerial experience in milk recording, database development and genetic evaluation to CDCB. Since 2008, he has served as the Interbull Centre executive director.

In 1991, Dürr earned a bachelor’s degree in agriculture from Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil; followed by master’s and doctorate degrees from McGill University, Montreal, in animal science, breeding and genetics. From 1997 to 2008, he held various positions with Universidade de Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, including Veterinary School professor, Dairy Herds Analysis Service general manager, Food Science Research Centre director and associate vice principal for research. In addition, he served as president of the Brazilian Milk Quality Council, a national, non-profit organization with a mission of promoting milk quality and mastitis prevention in Brazil, from 2004 to 2007.

As the Interbull executive director, Dürr helped coordinate the organization’s transition from academics to a business-oriented operation, incorporating new services into the portfolio. He also skillfully guided Interbull through the genomic revolution and provided a network for scientific and dairy industry communities to develop the framework of applied cattle genomics. Additionally, Dürr created a dynamic web site to improve communication with service users and the general public, implemented a quality assurance infrastructure to comply with international standards, and helped streamline genetic evaluation operations to handle multi-country pedigrees and estimated breeding values.

“With CDCB in its early stages of coordinating service responsibilities for calculating and distributing genetic evaluations and genomic predictions, providing dairy cattle management and benchmarking tools, managing data storage and analyzing and distributing dairy cattle data, João’s immense experience with business management transitioning, genetic evaluations, performance recording, data processing and database management will help the U.S. dairy cattle industry build on its world leadership position and remain the gold standard in global genetic progress,” said CDCB Chair Ole Meland. “João understands how the United States – the most influential dairy cattle breeding country in the world – functions and possesses the managerial skills needed to coordinate a multi-dimensional operation and the entrepreneurship required to build a solid infrastructure of services. We look forward to João leading and managing CDCB’s business and financial operations, and building and improving the data and practices among CDCB’s partners.”

CDCB conducts genetic evaluations for economically important traits of dairy cattle. The CDCB allied partners cooperator database is the largest in the world, which is devoted to dairy animals, with more than 120 million female phenotypic records and more than 480,000 males receiving genetic evaluations or genomic predictions.

Improved discovery of maternal grandsires

By George Wiggans and Lillian Bacheller

The pedigree maternal grandsire (MGS) is checked for consistency as each genotype is processed. If the pedigree MGS is determined to be unlikely or unknown, all bulls that are enough older than the animal to be an MGS and not one of the excluded relatives are considered as a possible MGS. A procedure that checks 1 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) at a time has been used. A recent report by van Kaam and Hayes (2013) suggested that greater accuracy could be achieved if whole intervals (half the chromosome plus 1 SNP) were checked as a unit. A test set of 5,133 genotypes was selected at random from families in which the animal, sire, dam, and MGS were all genotyped with more than 3,000 SNP. The single-SNP method found the true MGS 92.6% of the time, which was 1.2 percentage points more often than the interval method; therefore, the single-SNP method was retained. Based on analysis of true MGS, the single-SNP method was revised to allow MGS with a conflict percentage that caused them to be classified as unlikely to be proposed as the discovered MGS. The threshold for conflict percentage for a bull to be considered as an MGS was increased by 3 percentage points, and the minimum age of an MGS at the animal’s birth was reduced to 1,150 days. In addition, more bulls were considered after initial screening based on 1,000 SNP. Those changes increased the accuracy in the test set by 5.5 percentage points.

Reference:
van Kaam, J.B.C.H.M., and B.J. Hayes. 2013. Maternal grandsire verification and detection without imputation. Interbull Bull. 47:120–124.

Revised LD chip and incorporation of gene tests

By George Wiggans, Paul VanRaden, and Dan Null

The low density (LD) chip from Illumina was revised slightly; the new version will be referred to as LD2 with chip number 13 in formats 38 and 105. Chips LD and LD2 are nearly synonymous, with changes much smaller than between the 50K chip versions 1 and 2. Compared with LD, the LD2 excludes 5 previous markers and includes 8 additional markers from the 50K chip. Numbers of markers currently used are 6,785 from LD and 6,787 from LD2.

Several tests for simply inherited genetic conditions that previously were available on the GeneSeek Genomic Profiler version 2 (GP2) and GeneSeek High Density (GHD) for individual animals are now provided to CDCB for all animals. These tests include Arachnomelia, Beta-Lactoglobulin, Bovine Growth Hormone Receptor, BLAD, Citrullinemia, DUMPS, Leptin, Recessive Red, Mulefoot haplotype, SDM, SMA, and Weaver haplotype. Incorporation of direct gene tests or targeted markers for more animals will improve the haplotype tests for animals previously genotyped with chips that did not contain these and will allow more conditions to be reported and genomic predictions to be improved.

Revised calculation of genomic future inbreeding

By Chuanyu Sun and Paul VanRaden

Genomic future inbreeding (GFI) for Holsteins is now calculated as the average genomic relationship of each animal to proven bulls born in the last 10 years, whereas previously and for the other breeds the definition includes proven bulls and cows with records born in the last 10 years. In April, 73,422 Holstein cows had records in the reference population. Time required to compute genomic relationships for 400,637 young animals with all of the reference animals became excessive, whereas calculation of relationships with the 25,011 reference bulls was more manageable (< 1 day). The slightly revised definition caused only very small changes to GFI. Another purpose of the genomic relationships is to compare to pedigree relationships in order to detect incorrect pedigrees of imputed dams, but some of these may no longer be detected because of the reduced computation.

Jersey genotypes from Denmark

The genotype exchange with Denmark was previously announced in January, and monthly evaluations since then have included the additional Danish genotypes. This is just a reminder that April is the first full release when the added genotypes affect all bulls that were previously evaluated in December. For further information see:

January changes

The Council on Dairy Cattle breeding recently release the following report from their recent meeting.  Click here

The Genetic Evaluation Board (GEB) held its regular semi-annual meeting on Wednesday, March 5, 2014 at the Best Western Plus Hotel Universel in Drummondville, Québec, which was preceded the day before by its regular Open Industry Session. The following is a summary of the discussions and recommendations from the GEB, which will be considered by the Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) Board of Directors at its next meeting scheduled for May 7-8, 2014.

• Art Pruim from Plum Blossom Dairy in Osler, Saskatchewan, was elected as Chairman of the Genetic Evaluation Board for 2014.
• To be implemented for the April 2014 release, the GEB recommended that CDN apply an adjustment to traditional progeny proofs for production and major type traits for Holstein sires that have more than 30% of their milk-recorded daughters resulting from embryo transfer (ET). This adjustment, aimed at accounting for the preferred treatment of daughters, will reduce proofs by 55, 3.8 and 1.8 kg for milk, fat and protein, respectively, and by .5 for each of Conformation, Mammary System, Feet & Legs, Dairy Strength and Rump for every 10% ET above 30%. While relatively few sires will be affected by this adjustment, the accuracy of genomic evaluations for all animals is expected to be improved. 
• Based on a proposal received from CDN, the GEB supported the exclusion of insemination data collected by DHI agencies from the calculation of Semen Fertility ratings for bulls that have any reported breedings using sexed semen during each of the 12-month periods included in the analysis. This additional process for data editing will be implemented by the monthly analysis released in June 2014 at the latest and results provided to the A.I. member organizations. Unless properly reported, the inclusion of inseminations using sexed semen systematically biases the bull’s rating for Semen Fertility downwards, leading to an inaccurate evaluation. Going forward, DHI agencies are working to improve the completeness of recording breedings with sexed semen at the farm level and more A.I. organizations may submit insemination data directly to CDN.
• In an effort to maximize the accuracy of cow evaluations, the GEB recommended the implementation of a proposed methodology for adjusting the degree of deviation that an evaluation can have from the cow’s pedigree index based on the proof for their sire and maternal grandsire. This adjustment, which will apply to the production and type traits as well as Somatic Cell Score, has a more significant impact on high ranking cows that are not genotyped compared to those with a genomic evaluation. Implementation by CDN will apply to breeds with genomic evaluations, namely Holstein, Ayrshire, Jersey and Brown Swiss, and is targeted for the August 2014 release. 
• As part of the final stages prior to the implementation of official Mastitis Resistance evaluations for the Holstein, Ayrshire and Jersey breeds in August 2014, the GEB recommended that (1) the Mastitis Resistance index combine Clinical Mastitis in first lactation, Clinical Mastitis in later lactations and Somatic Cell Score with equal weights on each, (2) official genomic evaluations be computed for the Holstein breed, and (3) the minimum criteria for an official progeny proof be the same as those applied for Daughter Fertility based on the number of daughters and herds with data for Clinical Mastitis in first lactation and the corresponding Reliability. A table outlining the minimum criteria for an official traditional progeny proof for each trait within breed is available on the CDN web site. In accordance with the August 2014 genetic evaluation release, CDN will launch a new page providing details associated with evaluations for “Health” traits that will be linked to the Genetic Evaluation Summary page for each progeny proven sire.
• The GEB continued the discussions that ensued during the previous day’s Open Industry Session following up on the CDN Strategic Planning Session and meeting of the Board of Directors. Of particular interest was the mandate for CDN to explore the development of a second national profitability index aiming to maximize herd profitability for commercial dairy producers, alongside the LPI. Through consultation with the various breed associations, A.I. organizations and producer groups, CDN will provide a report on this mandate at the next Open Industry Session in October 2014. No changes to the LPI formula will be implemented prior to April 2015, which is also the target date for introduction of any second profitability index that may arise from this effort.
• In terms of eventual changes to the LPI formula, the GEB supported the inclusion of Mastitis Resistance in the Health and Fertility component for the Holstein, Ayrshire and Jersey breeds, instead of the current udder health traits, namely Somatic Cell Score, Udder Depth and Milking Speed. The GEB recommended that the calculation of LPI for genomic young sires also include an adjustment to credit bulls with an outcross pedigree, as reflected by having a publishable Relationship Value (R-Value) that is lower than average. The GEB also encouraged CDN to continue the ongoing analysis showing the existing association between LPI for each breed and realized profit at the herd level, including the publication of extension articles on this important topic.
• One of the key priority areas for CDN identified by the GEB is the improvement of procedures for processing MACE evaluations received from Interbull and the subsequent calculation of genomic evaluations. Specifically, traits where improvement is expected include female fertility, longevity, calving performance, the five major type traits as well as fat and protein deviation. CDN will report on the impact of improvements at the Open Industry Session in October 2014 with implementation planned by the December 2014 release.
• Given that Canada will officially participate in the Genomic MACE services provided by Interbull on an ongoing basis starting with the April 2014 release, the GEB recommended that CDN conduct an analysis of the ranking of young genomic sires marketed in Canada on the scales of other major countries based on their resulting Genomic MACE evaluations. 
• As follow-up to the project funded by Zoetis Canada that led to the 50K genotyping of over 550 Ayrshire cows born before 2008, CDN presented results showing the gain in accuracy of prediction with genomics achieved by their inclusion in the reference population. As a consequence, the GEB recommended that CDN work towards the inclusion of genotyped cows with an official LPI in the reference population for Ayrshire, Jersey and Brown Swiss genomic evaluations starting December 2014. An impact analysis including the gain in accuracy achieved will be presented at the Open Industry Session in October 2014.
• In conjunction with the genomic validation analyses conducted by CDN, the GEB recommended that a similar analysis be carried out to quantify the degree to which high LPI genomic heifers may be over-estimated compared to their evaluation as a cow. It was agreed that any level of bias in genomic evaluations for young sires and heifers should ideally be removed by improving the accuracy of traditional evaluations for their sires and dams.
• The GEB supported the continued effort of CDN aimed at developing extension tools for producers to better understand the risk of change in a genomic evaluation depending of the level of Reliability. It was recommended that CDN publish tables including the average Reliability of genomic evaluations on a trait by trait basis for various groups of A.I. sires as well as the associated confidence ranges that quantify the risk of change.
• The GEB received a technical update on research at CDN examining methods for approximating Reliability of Direct Genomic Values (DGVs) with the aim of increasing the frequency of genomic evaluation updates in the future. It was agreed that CDN could introduce simplified procedures that achieve this goal for monthly services provided to A.I. member organizations.
• The next Open Industry Session will be held on Tuesday, October 21, 2014 at the Holiday Inn in Guelph, Ontario with the Genetic Evaluation Board meeting the following day.

If there are any questions, concerns or comments regarding the recommendations of the Genetic Evaluation Board, as outlined in this summary, please feel free to contact committee members listed at http://www.cdn.ca/committees-geb.php or by contacting Brian Van Doormaal directly at Canadian Dairy Network.

Fee Schedule
The CDCB Fee Schedule for Genomic Evaluation Fees, updated December 17, 2013 is posted on the CDCB web site at www.cdcb.us. The revised schedule contained some reduced fees that were effective on the January 2014 invoices.

GMACE Update
The Interbull April GMACE run will be an implementation (unofficial) run. Previous action was to not contribute US genomic evaluations for use in Interbull routine (official) runs.
The CDCB board decided to contribute US genomic evaluations to the February GMACE test run under the condition there be two comparison test runs, one containing the US data and one without the US data, in an effort to ensure that Interbull GMACE results are accurate regardless of whether a major country’s data (such as the U.S.) are included or excluded. If this is not possible, then the US does not agree for its data to be used for the test run.

Research Advisory Working Group The Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding established a broad based Research Advisory Working Group (RAWG). The primary objective of RAWG is to review research results and make recommendations to CDCB Board on research results being considered for incorporation into the genetic evaluation programs. RAWG will make recommendations to the CDCB Board on genetic and management research priorities and be an advocate for new data needed to accomplish the CDCB’s objective to grow the quality and quantity of the cooperator database.

Historic/Predictor Bulls
Genotypes of bulls acquired through exchanges, Interbull (Brown Swiss) or efforts by partners (CDN for example) to add bulls to the predictor set where US genomic evaluation is not being used to market the bull, will receive fee code “W” (Waived). Foreign code W bulls over 15 months of age will have their evaluations released as though the AI Service Fee has been paid. Bulls being marketed using a US genomic evaluation with genotypes acquired through the above process can either have the AI Service Fee paid or be designated historic (Fee Code H) which allows them to contribute to the predictor population, but not have their evaluation released. At the discretion of the CDCB board, other bulls with traditional evaluations that are not being marketed may have their fees waived (fee code “W”). CDCB staff will suggest bulls to the CDCB board for this status.

American Dairy Goat Association (ADGA) Proposal for Genetic Evaluations
The CDCB board reviewed a proposal from ADGA to transfer the service portion of genetic evaluations and distribution of results from AIPL to ADGA. The data would be housed on the CDCB server and CDCB staff would offer limited technical support. The CDCB endorsed the concept and recommended modifications to the proposal to be sent to the ADGA.

Material License Agreement (MLA)
The proposed MLA of the Holstein Association USA and National Association of Animal Breeders as well as a standard template MLA has been shared with the Executive Committee of the CDCB. Next step is to share these MLA’s with the CDCB board for their review.

Council on Dairy Cattle Breeders, Chief Executive Officer Search Committee update The Chief Executive Officer position announcement and job description is posted on the CDCB web site at www.cdcb.us. Applications are due not later than Tuesday March 4 at 4:00 pm EST. Questions can be directed to Jay Mattison, CDCB CEO Search Committee Chair jmattison@dhia.org or Ole Meland, CDCB Chairomleand34476@gmail.com.

NOTE: THE APPLICATION DUE DATE WAS EXTENDED TO March 14, 2014.

The Interbull Centre provides genetic information services and applied research for improvement of livestock to a worldwide network and fulfills a mandate as a European Union Reference Laboratory (EURL).

The Interbull Centre is a section of the Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), which has been contracted by the International Committee for Animal Recording (ICAR) to be the operational unit for the Interbull permanent subcommittee and for the Interbeef working group. In this capacity Interbull Centre is responsible for conducting several genetic/genomic evaluation processes involving data from more than 32 member countries from five continents. As the EURL for Zootechnics, the Interbull centre interacts with the EU member states through the international genetic evaluation services and also provides assistance to the European Commission in issues related to bovine breeding and genetics. The Interbull Centre is formed by seven full time staff, one part time consultant, a PhD student and it is supported by the Interbull Secretariat.

As Chief of operations you are responsible for the daily working routines of the group concerning genetic information services. You have a responsibility to manage and develop the work activities, and organize the group in order to utilize and develop available skills in a suitable manner. Moreover, you are responsible for controlling documents and processes, strategically planning and prioritizing projects, and for the laboratory’s infrastructure and working environment. You keep regular contacts with geneticists and data managers from the member countries to ensure the quality of data exchanges between the Interbull Centre and the members. You are also responsible for monitoring the progress of several genetic evaluation processes conducted by the Interbull Centre’s service team. You are also a catalyst and motivator for the Interbull Centre’s development, both internally and externally. You work half time with your managerial duties and half time operatively within the group that handles large data sets and performs phenotypic-, pedigree and SNP-analyses in order to genetically merit individual bulls. The results are compiled and made available to the clients of interest.

Qualifications

You have a college/university degree in science with a preferable focus on computational- or quantitative genetics. It is meritorious if you hold a PhD in this subject area and have conducted your own research. For this role it is crucial that you are experienced in, or have a profound understanding of the process regarding handling large data sets. Moreover, it is desirable that you are experienced in Python, Fortran, R, or shell programming/scripting. You are a responsible person with extensive strategic, organisational and decision-making skills. You are expected to be service oriented with the ability to delegate and lead personnel, and your work is focused on quality. The role requires you to be outgoing, communicative and responsive with very good oral and written English. It is also desirable that you speak Swedish. We place great emphasis on your personal characteristics.

About the Interbull Centre
The International Committee for Animal Recording (ICAR) was founded in 1951 and is today the world-wide organization for the standardization of animal recording and productivity evaluation. During the past half century, ICAR has evolved into a global organization known for establishing standards and guidelines for animal recording, identification and genetic evaluations.

INTERBULL became a permanent sub-committee of the International Committee for Animal Recording (ICAR) in 1988, supported by its parent organizations EAAP and IDF, and also the FAO. It is managed by an ICAR appointed Steering Group, consisting of members from different countries.

Following a call for tender the Interbull Centre was established in 1991 under contract with the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences in Uppsala, Sweden, and with financial support from the Swedish Farmers’ Foundation for Agricultural Research, the dairy industry and the Swedish Board of Agriculture. In 1996 the European Union (EU) appointed the Interbull Centre as the community reference body for bovine evaluations. Additional information about the Interbull Centre can be obtained at www.interbull.org.

Employer: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

Location: Uppsala.

Scope: Full time. SLU applies a six month probationary period.

Application closing date: 10th of March 2014.

For information: In this recruitment SLU cooperates with Proffice Life Science. For questions regarding this position, contact Recruitment Consultant Stefan Grip, 073-343 41 45, stefan.grip@proffice.se. You are welcome to register your application atwww.profficelifescience.se.

Five annual management reports have been prepared by CDCB staff and are available at https://www.cdcb.us/publish/dhi.htm . These reports are the annual K report series that provide participation summaries for DHI and breeds.  Plans are to release the 2 additional reports (Reason Cows Exit the Herd, and Reproductive Status of Cows) later in the spring.

The Interbull Steering Committee (SC) held a web-phone conference on February 4, 2014, and this is the summary of the decisions.

Methodology to be adopted in the Feb 2014 GMACE test run

Interbull carried out a pilot GMACE study in December 2013 to define which reliabilities should be used for GMACE in practice. The objectives of the pilot study were:

1. Develop prediction equations to regress national reliabilities toward a globally standardized set of expectations.
2. Study the merits of predicted (fully regressed) reliabilities, partially regressed reliabilities, or the provided (not regressed) reliabilities in GMACE.
3. Investigate the option of a GMACE model that does not include variance estimation.
4. Carry out cross-validation tests to compare the different approaches.

Considering the input from participating countries and the Interbull Technical Committee (ITC), the SC decided to adopt the methodology which does not include a genomic variance estimation step and estimate the genomic reliabilities as a combination of predicted reliabilities and the national reliabilities provided by the users. This option is referred to as MP.5, and will be adopted as the official method in the February 2014 GMACE test run, as well as in the April and August 2014 runs.

Bull controlling country

The SC has decided to request additional information from the service users regarding which bulls are controlled by companies/stud within the area of influence of each country participating in Interbull international comparisons (MACE & GMACE). This information will have strategic use for interpreting all types of results distributed by Interbull and it will play an important role on the GMACE publication policy. The steps to be taken are the following:

1. All countries sending data for GMACE have the option to send a list of bulls which they claim to have the control over until Feb 28, 2014.
2. The lists received will be merged and made available to all participating countries, shortly after data reception, allowing potential conflicts to be resolved before distribution.
3. For bulls included in the supplied controlling country list, publication status declared by the controlling country will take preference regardless of publication status in other countries.
4. The previously distributed ”ownership” list will be renamed as ”publication status” list and will contain a list of bulls which comply with the following criteria for the controlling country:
   1. Status of bull = 10 (AI bull)
   2. Publication status = Y (bull meets the national standards for official publication)
5. For any bull not included in any user-supplied controlling country file, the bull will be considered publishable in routine runs if at least one GEBV record included in GMACE, for any population and any trait, has.
6. Given that the Feb 2014 GMACE test run determines which changes can be implemented in both the April and August runs the publication policy adopted by participating countries must reflect the national policy to be adopted in both following runs.
   1. Status of bull = 10 (AI bull)
   2. Publication status = Y (bull meets the national standards for official publication

Official adoption of GMACE

Because the February 2014 GMACE test run is the first official run adopting the method MP.5, the SC has decided that the April 2014 GMACE run will also be considered as an implementation run. These are the features of implementation runs:

• Implementation runs are Interbull evaluations used to introduce a completely new procedure into service and serves as a transition between a successful test run and the first official routine run using the introduced change in the services.
• Implementation runs follow the same calendar, turnaround time and distribution policy as the official routine runs that will adopt the procedure implemented afterwards.
• Publication of implementation runs results in national scales is facultative and should follow the national strategy to communicate the changes introduced internally.
• Service users that decide to publish implementation run results must indicate that GMACE values are from an implementation run.

The SC also decided that the August 2014 GMACE run will be the first GMACE routine run, unless major technical impediments happen to occur.
For publication of the results from implementation runs and routine runs please see: CoP Appendix V: Publication guidelines
Considering the considerable resources already applied into GMACE runs, the SC has decided to keep the service fee update for 2014 as previously proposed (SC Executive Summary – Jan 2014).

2014 ICAR/Interbull Conference

The 2014 Interbull Meeting will be held in conjunction with the 39th ICAR Session and the IDF/ISO Analytical Week in Berlin, Germany. The early bird registration is February 16, 2014 and the call for titles for the Interbull Open sessions is open until March 16, 2014. More details in the EVENT PAGE.

The 2014 Interbull Meeting will be held in conjunction with the 39th ICAR Session and the IDF/ISO Analytical Week in Berlin, Germany.

The Interbull annual meeting is the leading event for research on bovine genetic and genomic national and international evaluations and some 200 scientists and industry representatives from 35 countries are expected to attend. The 2014 ICAR/INTERBULL Conference is organized by the German Cattle Breeders’ Federation (ADR).

The venue for the meeting will be The Estrel Berlin Hotel & Convention Center, situated at Sonnenallee 225, 12057 Berlin.

Registration to the 2013 Interbull Meeting:

Registration should be made using the following link: http://www.icar2014.de/

Interbull Open Sessions:

• Advances in genomic selection
• National and international genetic evaluations

Working together to improve genomic evaluations for Jersey breeders across the United States and Canada, the American Jersey Cattle Association (AJCA), the Cooperative Dairy DNA Repository (CDDR) represented by National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB), and Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) have increased the North American Jersey database of genotypes on proven bulls by more than 1,100 through an exchange of Jersey genotypes with Scandinavian-based Viking Genetics. The reliability of genomic predictions increased 1.8%.

The formation of the CDDR by six U.S. and one Canadian A.I. center almost 20 years ago provided the sire DNA which enabled research by the Agriculture Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (ARS USDA), the University of Guelph, and CDN that resulted in genomic predictions now being utilized by dairy producers in both countries.

The new agreement establishes an ongoing exchange of genotypes for progeny-proven bulls in North America and Scandinavia. This groundbreaking agreement will further enhance selection programs aimed at maximizing genetic potential while maintaining genetic diversity.

The agreement is the culmination of several years of collaboration between the CDDR, AJCA, and CDN to define exchange terms with Viking Genetics. Gordon Doak, President of NAAB comments, “It is a great step forward to finalize a collaboration agreement with Viking Genetics. Together we represent the two largest Jersey breeding programs in the world and the agreement represents a huge opportunity to enhance the development of Jersey breeding.” Agrees Neal Smith, Executive Secretary of AJCA, “This is a great opportunity for Jersey breeders around the world to benefit from sharing information to improve the Jersey cow.”

The American Jersey Cattle Association, based in Reynoldsburg, Ohio, is the largest Jersey registry association in the world and represents more than 2,300 active members. The National Association of Animal Breeders, based in Columbia, Mo., represented the CDDR, whose aim is to improve the accuracy and reliability of genomic evaluations for the benefit of breeders in the U.S. and Canada.

Working together to improve genomic evaluations for Jersey breeders across Canada and the United States, Canadian Dairy Network (CDN), with Jersey Canada as one of its members, the Cooperative Dairy DNA Repository (CDDR), represented by the National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB), and the American Jersey Cattle Association (AJCA) have increased the North American Jersey database of genotypes on proven bulls by more than 1,100 through an exchange of Jersey genotypes with Scandinavian based Viking Genetics. The reliability of genomic evaluations increased 1.8% in the United States with similar gains expected in Canada due to the 46% increase in the size of the Jersey reference population for genomics.

2014 marks five years since the implementation of genomics in Canada and has the world of genetic improvement ever changed! Genomics was boasted by scientists as a technology that would revolutionize genetic improvement strategies and significantly increase rates of genetic improvement. To take a closer look at the impact of genomics on genetic selection in Canada, one approach is to assess changes on each component affecting genetic progress in dairy cattle selection.

Rate of Genetic Gain

There are four key factors that affect the rate of genetic progress achieved by various selection strategies. These include:

• The intensity of selection, which is measured by the proportion of the population that is used as parents of the next generation,
• The accuracy of selection, which is usually measured by the average Reliability of genetic evaluations used to make decisions about parents of the next generation of animals,
• The degree of genetic variability that exists in the population for each trait of interest, which would not be significantly affected in only five years, and
• The generation interval, which is measured by the average age of the parents when the next generation is born.

When assessing each of these components of genetic progress realized in a breed, there are four pathways of selection to be considered, of which the selection of sires and dams of future A.I. young sires are the two most influential. At the herd level, it is the producer’s selection of sires to be used that has traditionally been responsible for about 90% of the genetic progress achieved. Genomics does, however, offer producers more opportunity to select the parents of future replacement heifers, especially in conjunction with the use of reproductive technologies such as sexed semen and/or embryo transfer.

Intensity of Selection

A critical and major shift that has taken place due to the arrival of genomics is the ability for A.I. organizations to genotype potential young bull candidates prior to any decision to purchase for semen collection. As shown in Figure 1, this new pre-selection step became available for young bull candidates born in 2008, at which time roughly 5,000 young bulls were genotyped as a tool to identify a group of approximately 2,000 that were eventually purchased for A.I. in North America. Nowadays, for bulls born in 2013, more than 29,000 are expected to be genotyped and roughly 2,000 are expected to be purchased by an A.I. organization: a ratio of nearly 1 in 15!

Accuracy of Selection

In terms of improvement in the accuracy of selection decisions, there are two areas where genomics has had a significant impact. Firstly, the average Reliability of genetic evaluations available for genotyped young bulls and heifers has almost doubled compared to using Parent Average alone. For genomic young bulls that are sons of a genomic young sire, rather than a progeny proven sire, the gain in Reliability over Parent Average is slightly reduced to 30%, instead of 33%, to reach an average Reliability of 66% for LPI in Holsteins. Secondly, for progeny proven sires, genomics has significantly improved the accuracy of evaluations for traits with low heritability, namely Herd Life, Daughter Calving Ability, and Daughter Fertility.

Generation Interval

Not only has genomics allowed for the pre-screening of potential young bulls for entry into A.I., as shown in Figure 1, but the increased accuracy of evaluations for genotyped young bulls, heifers and cows has turned the focus of selection decisions to younger animals. Figure 2 shows the trend in the average age of parents of genotyped Holstein bulls by year of birth. For bulls born prior to 2009, which was before genomic evaluations were official in North America, the average age of sires being considered for entry into A.I. was over 6 years, while their dams averaged about 4 years of age. For genotyped young bull candidates born in 2013, the average age of their sire reached 3 years (i.e.: 55% reduction) and the age of their dams reduced by 25% to also equal 3 years.

Proven Versus Young Sires

A key outcome of genomics has been an expected attraction by producers toward genomic young sires with a corresponding reduction in usage of proven sire semen. Part of this attraction stems from the superior level of genetic potential being offered to producers interested in using genomic young sires. In fact, prior to genomics, the average LPI of young sires entering A.I. was increasing, on average, by 92 points per year, which has now increased to 160 LPI points per year for bulls born since 2009. Prior to genomics, young sire semen occupied less than 40% of the market share with progeny proven sires representing the main A.I. product of interest to producers. After an initial spike in usage of genomic young sires in 2010, there has been a continuous increase in interest towards this category of A.I. sire, which surpassed 51% of the market share in 2013 (Figure 3). In fact, for every month since May 2013, over 50% of Holstein inseminations in Canada have been done using semen from genomic young sires.

Summary

Achieving genetic progress in any breed of dairy cattle requires balancing selection intensity and accuracy with generation interval without having a negative impact of genetic variability. For decades past this was done by efficient young sire proving programs aimed at identifying elite sires once they were progeny proven at 5 years of age and subsequently using them as sires of the next generation of replacement heifers and young bulls entering A.I. With the arrival of genomic evaluations in 2009, this traditional, well-proven strategy has changed. Thanks to genomics, tens of thousands of candidate young bulls are now being genotyped each year, of
which one in 15 are currently being selected for entry into A.I. based on genetic evaluations that have Reliability levels almost doubled compared to Parent Average alone. This pre-selection step using genomics has contributed to the superior genetic level of young sires offered to producers, which continues to increase every year at a faster rate than before. The use of younger parents, including unproven genomic young bulls as well as genotyped heifers and young cows, to produce the next generation of A.I. young sires is also an important factor contributing to the increased rates of genetic progress achieved to date. Simply stated, genomics has already had a major impact on genetic selection decisions taken by A.I. organizations and this, in turn, has translated into an increased attraction towards genomic young sires that now occupy more than 50% of the market share in Canada.

Source: Canadian Dairy Network