Banner

Indian Journal of Animal Research

  • Chief EditorM. R. Saseendranath

  • Print ISSN 0367-6722

  • Online ISSN 0976-0555

  • NAAS Rating 6.40

  • SJR 0.233, CiteScore: 0.606

  • Impact Factor 0.5 (2025)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Indian Journal of Animal Research, volume 52 issue 1 (january 2018) : 1-6

Sire evaluation using animal model versus different conventional methods in red sindhi cattle

P.K. Mallick, A.K. Ghosh, A.S. Rajendiran
1<p>Southern Regional Research Centre,&nbsp;ICAR-Central Sheep and Wool Research Institute, Mannavanur-624 103, Tamil Nadu, India.</p>
Cite article:- Mallick P.K., Ghosh A.K., Rajendiran A.S. (2016). Sire evaluation using animal model versus differentconventional methods in red sindhi cattle . Indian Journal of Animal Research. 52(1): 1-6. doi: 10.18805/ijar.v0i0f.3805.

ABSTRACT

The effectiveness of sire evaluation is the backbone of any breed improvement programme as much as 61% of genetic gain in dairy cattle results from selection of sires through “bulls to breed cows” and “bulls to breed bulls” path. The application of latest and simplex method of sire evaluation like BLUPF90 in Indian breeds is scanty. The present investigation was planned to evaluate the Red Sindhi sires by this method and to compare the effectiveness of BLUPF90 method with other conventional methods of sire evaluation in Red Sindhi cattle. The records of production and reproduction performances of first lactation traits of 717 Red Sindhi cows, progeny of 58 sires, spread over a period of 40 years (1966-2005)  from CCBF, Chiplima, Orissa under the control of Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India and CBF, Kalsi, Deheradun, Uttarakhand were analyzed. The present study was single and multi-trait evaluation of breeding values of Red Sindhi sires. The overall least squares population mean for first lactation milk yield (FLMY) was 1536.35±54.87 kg. The average breeding value of sires of single trait from different methods ranged from 1536.35 kg (LSM, DFREML and BLUPF90-Dairy Pack) to 1588.50 kg (simple daughter average) but in multi-trait method the breeding value does not vary with each other. The comparison of different method of sire evaluation based on single trait for FLMY only shows that the DFREML model for single trait should be preferred over the BLUP, LSM and simple daughter average methods for evaluating the sire breeding value. However, if a sire-breeding value is to be computed from multi traits then BLUPF90 model may be preferred over DFREML model.

REFERENCES


  1. Arora, K.C. (1981). Relative efficiency of different methods of indexing the breeding work of dairy bulls. Thesis Abstr. Haryana Agricultural University 9: 36-37. 

  2. Aswathanaryana, T., Govindaiah, M.G. and Jayaprakash. (2003). Relative efficiency of various sire evaluation procedures. Indian. Vet. J. 80: 550-53.

  3. Banik S and Gandhi R S (2006). Animal model versus conventional methods of sire evaluation in Sahiwal cattle. Asian-    Aust.J. Anim. Sci. 19: 1225-28. 

  4. Dahiya, D.S., Khana, A.S. and Singh, R.P. (2005). Effectiveness of sire evaluation for milk yield with auxiliary traits in Hariana cattle. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 75: 518-23.

  5. Dash, S.K., Gupta, A.K., Singh, A., Chakravarty, A. K., Madhusoodanan, M., Valsalan, J., Pushp Raj, S. and Hussain, A. (2014). Evaluation of efficiency of sire model and animal model in Holstein Friesian crossbred cattle considering first lactation production and fertility traits. Veterinary World 7: 933-937.

  6. Deb, S.M., Gurnani, M. and Chacko, C.T. (1998). Comparison of sire evaluation methods under field conditions. Indian J. Dairy Sci. 51: 210-15.

  7. G. Bajetha, Singh, C.V., Barwal, R.S. (2015). Sire evaluation by different methods in crossbred cattle American Advances Journal of Natural Science., 1: 22-26.

  8. Harvey, W.R. (1987). Least squares analysis of data with unequal subclass numbers. ARS H-4, USDA, Washington D.C.

  9. Harvey, W.R. 1990. User guide for LSMLMW and MIXMDL Package. Mix Model Least Squares and Maximum Likelihood Computer Programme. PC-2 version. Mimeograph, Columbia, Chio, USA.

  10. Hossain, K.B., Takayanagi, S., Miyake, T., Moriya. K., Bhiyan, A.K.F.H and Sasaki, Y. (2002). Statistical genetic studies on cattle breeding for dairy productivity in Bangladesh: I. Genetic improvement for milk performance of local cattle populations. Asian-Australian J. Anim. Sci., 15: 627-632. 

  11. Jain, A. (1996). Sire evaluation under multiple trait models in Murrah buffaloes. Ph.D. Thesis, National Dairy Research Institute, Deemed University, Karnal, India.

  12. Jain, A. and Sadana, D.K. (2000). Sire evaluation using animal model and conventional methods in Murrah buffaloes. Asian Australasian J. Anim. Sci. 13: 1196-200.

  13. Jain, J. P and Malhotra, J. C. (1971). Comparative study of different methods of indexing sires. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 41: 1101 – 1108.

  14. Lodhi G., Singh C.V., Barbal, R.S., Shahi, B.N. and Dalal, D. S. (2015). Estimation of Breeding Values by Different Sire Evaluation Methods for Selection of Sires in Crossbred Cattle . J Vet Sci Med Diagn 4:5.

  15. Meyer, K. (1998). DFREML (Derivative Free Restricted Maximum Likelihood) Programme. Version 3.0b. User notes. University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia. 

  16. Misztal, I., Duangjinda, M. and Tsuruta, S. (2004). BLUPF 90, Dairy Pack Version 2; Genetic Evaluation Program for Dairy Cattle, Department of Animal and Dairy Science, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA30602.

  17. Mukherjee, S. 2005. Genetic evaluation of Frieswal cattle, Ph.D. Thesis, submitted to National Dairy Research Institute (Deemed University), Karnal, India.

  18. Robertson A and Rendel J M (1954). The performance of heifers got by artificial insemination. J. Agri. Sci., 44: 184 – 192.

  19. Sahana, G and Gurnani, M. (2000). Performance of crossbred cattle and comparison of sires evaluation methods under organized farm condition. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 70:409-414.

  20. Singh, B.P., Kumar, V. and Chauhan, V.P.S. (1992). Comparison of different methods of sire evaluation. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 62: 749–53.

  21. Singh, P .K and Singh, B. P. 1999. Efficacy of different methods in genetic evaluation of Murrah sires. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 69: 1044-1047.

  22. Tailor, S.P., Banerjee, A.K. and Yadav, S.B.S. (2000). Comparison of different methods of sire evaluation. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 70: 73-74.

  23. Tajane, K.R. and Rai, A.V. (1990). Efficiency of sire evaluation methods to improve milk yield of Sahiwal x Holstein-    Friesian cattle. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 60: 183–91

     
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)