Application of monthly test-day milk yield in Murrah buffalo

VIJAY KUMAR; A K CHAKRAVARTY; C V PATIL; V JAMUNA; A MAHAJAN; P R SHIVAHRE; A MAGOTRA

doi:10.56093/ijans.v84i11.44779

Authors

VIJAY KUMAR Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Veterinary University, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh
A K CHAKRAVARTY National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
C V PATIL National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
V JAMUNA National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A MAHAJAN National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
P R SHIVAHRE National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A MAGOTRA National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v84i11.44779

Keywords:

Best linear unbiased prediction, Buffalo, Contemporary comparison, Least-squares, Simple regressed least-squares, Sire evaluation

Abstract

In the present study buffalo herds of Murrah breed at various centres are studied to evaluate the sires on the basis of as many daughters as possible. The data pertaining to first lactation monthly test-day milk yield (FLMTDMY) and first lactation 305-days or less milk yield (FL305DMY) of 1,105 Murrah buffalo during 1993 to 2010 at National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal (NDRI); Central Institute for Research on Buffalo, Hisar (CIRB); Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana (GADVASU) and Choudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar (CCSHAU) were collected and adjusted against significant environmental influences. In the present study FLMTDMY and FL305DMY were significantly affected by farm. First lactation records of 832 Murrah buffalo were used for evaluating 95 sires used in 7 sets. First lactation monthly test-day 6 milk yield (FLMTD6MY) had the highest genetic (0.99 ± 0.04) and phenotypic (0.78 ± 0.02) correlation with FL305DMY in Murrah buffaloes. An attempt was being made in the present investigation to estimate and compare the estimated breeding values (EBVs) of Murrah bulls through different sire evaluation methods, viz. contemporary comparison (CC), least-squares (LS), simple regressed least-squares (SRLS) and best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) for FLMTDMY. The rank correlations among all the 4 methods of sire evaluation were highly statistically significant. BLUP method was found to be more efficient, accurate and stable with lowest genetic variation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bajetha G. 2006. ‘Selection of sires by using different sires evaluation methods in crossbred cattle.’ Ph.D. Thesis, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, India.

Banik S and Gandhi R S. 2006. Animal model versus conventional models of sire evaluation in Sahiwal cattle. Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Sciences 19: 125–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2006.1225

Becker W A. 1975. Manual of Quantitative Genetics. 3rd edn, Washington State Univ. Pullman, 99163, USA.

Dalal D S, Rathi S S and Raheja K L. 1999. Relationship between sires estimated breeding values for first lactation and lifetime traits in Hariana cattle. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 72: 398–401.

Dubey P P, Singh C V and Prasad R B. 2006. Relationship between sire’s estimated breeding values for first lactation and lifetime traits and ranking of sires in Sahiwal and its cross. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 76: 824–28.

Food and Agriculture Organization. 2012. Buffalo production and research. (www.fao.org.com).

Harvey W R. 1979. Accuracy of Simplified regressed least-squares (SRLS) vs best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) method for ranking sires. Indian Journal of Animal Genetics and Breeding 1: 7–19.

Harvey W R. 1990. Guide for LSMLMW, PC-1 Version, mixed model least square and maximum likely hood computer programme. Mimeograph, Ohio State University, USA.

Henderson C R. 1975. Best linear unbiased prediction under a selection model. Biometrics. 31: 423–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2529430

Jamrozik J and Schaeffer L R. 1997. Estimates of genetic parameters for a test day model with random regressions for yield traits of first lactation Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 8:762–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)75996-4

Kaygisiz A, 2013. Estimation of genetic parameters and breeding values for dairy cattle using test-day milk yield records. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 23: 345–49.

Kramer C Y. 1957. Extension of multiple range tests to group correlated adjusted means. Biometrics 13: 13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3001898

Krishnan K S. 1956. A new index for milk production. Indian Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry 26: 149– 70.

Moges T G, Singh C V, Barwal R S, Kumar D and Singh C B. 2009. Evaluation of sires using different multitrait sire evaluation methods in crossbred cattle. Indian Journal of Dairy Science 62: 1–4.

Mukherjee S, Joshi B K and Gaur G K. 2007. Sire evaluation methods in Frieswal cattle. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 77: 123–26.

Robertson A. and Rendel J M. 1954. The performance of heifers got by artificial insemination. Journal of Agriculture Science (Cambridge) 44: 184–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S002185960004627X

Singh V K and Singh C V. 2011. Sire evaluation using animal model and conventional methods for milk production in crossbred cattle. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 81: 77– 79.

Snedecor G W and Cochran W G. 1994. Statistical Methods. Oxford & IBH Publ. Co., New Delhi, India, Reprinted, 1975.

Steel R G D and Torrie J H. 1960. Principles and Procedure of Statistics with Special Reference to the Biological Sciences. McGrew Hill Book Company Inc. New York. 550.

Sundaresan D, Gurnani M and Sindhu S P. 1965. Evaluation of breeding value of bulls used in two herds in India. Journal of Dairy Science 48: 1498–1505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(65)88506-X