About 60 attendees tuned into the roundtable discussion on genetic evaluations moderated by Christine Baes from the University of Guelph. Participants represented industry, academic, and government perspectives; the panelists were comprised of Joao Durr from the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding, John Cole from the USDA Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, Jay Weiker from the National Association of Animal Breeders, Chuck Sattler from Select Sires, Steven Larmer from Semex Alliance, and Mike Coffey from Scotland’s Rural College.
Baes initiated the discussion by asking panelists what factors influence the selection tools they develop. Durr and Cole explained that the dairy cattle selection indices that are developed and updated every few years by the USDA and CDCB are primarily influenced by economic factors in addition to scientific advances. However, input from academics in the dairy industry, producers, and the NAAB are also accounted for in index development. Weiker reminded us that the NAAB represents its membership, which is comprised of AI companies, allowing industry to have some input in national index development as well. Industry perspectives from Sattler and Larmer stressed the importance of farm profitability in combination with producer demands. Both panelists mentioned that their respective companies have strong international markets and explained that international demands impact what genetics they market. Coffey emphasized that what producers are interested in selecting for is fluid and often influenced by dairy scientists, though changing their overall selection goals can take time. He also echoed many panel members in suggesting that genetic evaluations should reflect the demands of the future.
As the panel addressed audience questions, common themes arose in the discussion surrounding traits and technologies that are predicted to hold importance in the future. The consumer’s perception of sustainability in dairy production is likely to increase the demand for feed efficiency and greenhouse gas evaluations. Other traits that meet niche demands such as A2 or improve perception of animal welfare such as polled may become incentivized by milk processors. However, it is uncertain if gene editing technology could be used to meet these incentives because of consumer perceptions. Panelists also speculated ways evaluation methods may evolve. As precision dairying technology continues to advance, geneticists will have access to larger, more robust data sets that may allow for evaluations beyond those that use traditional additive genetic models. It was suggested that large herds could be incentivized to share enough phenotypic data to allow for non-additive evaluations and evaluations that consider re-rankings due to genotype by environment effects. It was also proposed that as producers continue to use beef on dairy the development of terminal selection indices could be profitable.
The panel members acknowledged that in our changing industry, there is still great diversity in production models in North America and internationally. From the discussion, I took away that cows of the future must be profitable and efficient, but that does not mean one cow fits all. Considerations toward animal health, fertility, and sustainability are all likely to be made in developing selection programs. While the dairy cow of the future may look different among the panelists and producers, it is clear that genetic and genomic evaluations will continue to evolve so that producers can breed cows that fit the needs of their environment and the market.
Bailey Basiel is a Master’s student at Penn State under the mentorship of Dr. Chad Dechow. She earned her B.S. in Animal Science at the University of New Hampshire and will pursue her PhD at Penn State in the fall with the continued support of Dr. Dechow and the guidance of Dr. Tara Felix. Bailey’s research interests include applied genetic selection for animal health and development of selection indices for beef on dairy matings.
Source: ADSA
