Predicting the impact of genotype-by-genotype interaction on the purebred-crossbred genetic correlation from phenotype and genotype marker data of parental lines.

BACKGROUND: The genetic correlation between purebred (PB) and crossbred (CB) performances ([Formula: see text]) partially determines the response in CB when selection is on PB performance in the parental lines. An earlier study has derived expressions for an upper and lower bound of [Formula: see text], using the variance components of the parental purebred lines, including e.g. the additive genetic variance in the sire line for the trait expressed in one of the dam lines. How to estimate these variance components is not obvious, because animals from one parental line do not have phenotypes for the trait expressed in the other line. Thus, the aim of this study was to propose and compare three methods for approximating the required variance components. The first two methods are based on (co)variances of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) in the line of interest, either accounting for shrinkage (VCGEBV-S) or not (VCGEBV). The third method uses restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimates directly from univariate and bivariate analyses (VCREML) by ignoring that the variance components should refer to the line of interest, rather than to the line in which the trait is expressed. We validated these methods by comparing the resulting predicted bounds of [Formula: see text] with the [Formula: see text] estimated from PB and CB data for five traits in a three-way cross in pigs. RESULTS: With both VCGEBV and VCREML, the estimated [Formula: see text] (plus or minus one standard error) was between the upper and lower bounds in 14 out of 15 cases. However, the range between the bounds was much smaller with VCREML (0.15-0.22) than with VCGEBV (0.44-0.57). With VCGEBV-S, the estimated [Formula: see text] was between the upper and lower bounds in only six out of 15 cases, with the bounds ranging from 0.21 to 0.44. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that using REML estimates of variance components within and between parental lines to predict the bounds of [Formula: see text] resulted in better predictions than methods based on GEBV. Thus, we recommend that the studies that estimate [Formula: see text] with genotype data also report estimated genetic variance components within and between the parental lines.

Predicting survival and longevity of sows using purebred and crossbred data.

Survival and longevity are very important traits in pig breeding. From an economic standpoint, it is favorable to keep the sows for another parity instead of replacing them and, from the animal's perspective, better welfare is achieved if they do not experience health problems. It is challenging to record longevity in purebred (PB) nucleus herds because animals are more likely to be replaced based on breeding value and high replacement rates rather than inability to produce. Crossbred (CB) sows are, however, submitted to lower replacement rates and are more likely to be kept in the farm longer if they can produce large and robust litters. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate whether the use of CB phenotypes could improve prediction accuracy of longevity for PBs. In addition, a new definition of survival was investigated. The analyzed data included phenotypes from two PB dam lines and their F1 cross. Three traits were evaluated: 1) whether or not the sow got inseminated for a second litter within 85 d of first farrowing (Longevity 1-2), 2) how many litters the sow can produce within 570 d of first farrowing [Longevity 1-5 (LGY15)], and 3) a repeatability trait that indicates whether or not the sow survived until the next parity (Survival). Traits were evaluated both as the same across breeds and as different between breeds. Results indicated that longevity is not the same trait in PB and CB animals (low genetic correlation). In addition, there were differences between the two PB lines in terms of which trait definition gave the greatest prediction accuracy. The repeatability trait (Survival) gave the greatest prediction accuracy for breed B, but LGY15 gave the greatest prediction accuracy for breed A. Prediction accuracy for CBs was generally poor. The Survival trait is recorded earlier in life than LGY15 and seemed to give a greater prediction accuracy for young animals than LGY15 (until own phenotype was available). Thus, for selection of young animals for breeding, Survival would be the preferred trait definition. In addition, results indicated that lots of data were needed to get accurate estimates of breeding values and that, if CB performance is the breeding goal, CB phenotypes should be used in the genetic evaluation.