Enhanced comment feature has been enabled for all readers including those not logged in. Click on the Discussion tab (top left) to add or reply to discussions.
Calving Difficulty: Difference between revisions
(→Usage) |
m (→Usage) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
clicking on the Create button or redlink and reload the page | clicking on the Create button or redlink and reload the page | ||
--> | --> | ||
[[Category:Management/Convenience Traits]] | |||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
Place brief trait definition/description here | Place brief trait definition/description here | ||
--> | --> | ||
Calving difficulty is a subjective measure of the degree of dystocia. Dystocia can be caused by a large pre-natal calf, small pelvic area of the dam, lack of sufficient uterine contractions, insufficient dilation of the cervix, or mispositioned calf prior to parturition. Calving ease [[Expected Progeny | Calving difficulty is a subjective measure of the degree of [[Glossary#D | dystocia]]. Dystocia can be caused by a large pre-natal calf, small pelvic area of the dam, lack of sufficient uterine contractions, insufficient dilation of the cervix, or mispositioned calf prior to parturition. Calving ease [[Expected Progeny Difference | EPDs]] are produced from calving difficulty scores and birth weight observations. | ||
===Phenotype=== | ===Phenotype=== | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
No adjustments are made to calving difficulty scores. | No adjustments are made to calving difficulty scores. | ||
=== | ===Contemporary Group=== | ||
<!-- Discuss how contemporary groups are formed --> | <!-- Discuss how contemporary groups are formed --> | ||
The same [[Contemporary Groups | contemporary group]] definition for [[Birth Weight | birth weight]] should be used for calving difficulty. This includes year/season of birth, management group. Some organizations that use threshold analysis for determining calving ease [[Expected Progeny Difference | EPDs]] will not divide calving difficulty contemporary group by sex of the calf in order to increase the number of contemporary groups with variation. If other methods for analysis are used such as random regression or a linear model, then the | The same [[Contemporary Groups | contemporary group]] definition for [[Birth Weight | birth weight]] should be used for calving difficulty. This includes year/season of birth, management group. Some organizations that use threshold analysis for determining calving ease [[Expected Progeny Difference | EPDs]] will not divide calving difficulty contemporary group by sex of the calf in order to increase the number of contemporary groups with variation. If other methods for analysis are used such as random regression or a linear model, then the contemporary group should be divided by sex of calf. | ||
===Genetic Evaluation=== | ===Genetic Evaluation=== | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
E.g., direct, maternal, permanent environment due to dam. | E.g., direct, maternal, permanent environment due to dam. | ||
--> | --> | ||
Calving ease EPDs are produced from calving difficulty | Calving ease EPDs are produced from calving difficulty scores. They are published on a probability scale and are then the opposite of calving difficulty, such that a higher value means more ease of calving. Because the dependent variable in the genetic evaluation model is calving difficulty the translation to a probability must be performed, usually using the normal cumulative density function. | ||
Scores of 1 through 4 are used and score 5 observations are not used because this has been shown to not be heritable and is a result of different effects than the other scores. | |||
Models vary between organizations producing calving ease EPDs. Some groups use a threshold model method. This has the disadvantage of requiring variation in observations within the contemporary group. Thus, all data from contemporary groups with no variation are eliminated. This can cause bias in the prediction. | Models vary between organizations producing calving ease EPDs. Some groups use a threshold model method. This has the disadvantage of requiring variation in observations within the contemporary group. Thus, all data from contemporary groups with no variation are eliminated. This can cause bias in the prediction. | ||
An alternative is to fit a random regression model or a simple linear model, which has been shown to be sufficient and will then use the no variation | An alternative is to fit a random regression model, or a simple linear model, which has been shown to be sufficient and will then use the data from contemporary groups with no variation in calving difficulty. | ||
Some analyses use calving ease observations from all ages of a female. However, in most breeds, very little variation is observed after dams reach three years or older. | Some analyses use calving ease observations from all ages of a female. However, in most breeds, very little variation is observed after dams reach three years or older. | ||
Birth weight observations on all ages of dams should be fit in a multiple trait analysis with calving difficulty scores. A maternal effect for calving difficulty should be included. In most | Birth weight observations on all ages of dams should be fit in a multiple trait analysis with calving difficulty scores. | ||
A maternal effect for calving difficulty should be included, and thus a maternal calving ease EPD is calculated. In most presentations of EPDs for making selection decisions, a total maternal calving ease EPD is reported along with calving ease direct: Total Maternal Calving Ease EPD = Maternal Calving Ease EPD + 1/2 Direct Calving Ease EPD. In a few evaluations of indicus-influenced breeds, the maternal is reported but not the total maternal. | |||
===Usage=== | ===Usage=== | ||
| Line 68: | Line 72: | ||
Discuss in what circumstances the trait is an ERT or an indicator trait and how the trait should be used and not used. | Discuss in what circumstances the trait is an ERT or an indicator trait and how the trait should be used and not used. | ||
--> | --> | ||
Calving ease is an [[Economically Relevant Traits | economically relevant trait]] in all production systems. | Calving ease is an [[Economically Relevant Traits | economically relevant trait]] in all production systems. However, producers often place more emphasis on calving ease than an optimal [[Selection Index | selection index]] would indicate is appropriate. In other words, producers often choose reduced risk (higher calving ease EPD) at the expense of profit maximization (higher index value). | ||
Latest revision as of 19:07, 3 February 2022
Calving difficulty is a subjective measure of the degree of dystocia. Dystocia can be caused by a large pre-natal calf, small pelvic area of the dam, lack of sufficient uterine contractions, insufficient dilation of the cervix, or mispositioned calf prior to parturition. Calving ease EPDs are produced from calving difficulty scores and birth weight observations.
Phenotype
Producers are asked to score the degree of calving difficulty using the following subjective scores:
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 1 | No difficulty, no assistance required |
| 2 | Minor difficulty, some assistance |
| 3 | Major difficulty, usually mechanical assistance |
| 4 | Caesarian section or other surgery |
| 5 | Abnormal presentation |
Cows that calve without assistance between daily checks can be assumed to have calved without assistance even if the calving was not observed. A score of 1 should be reported for these. All calvings should receive a score even if the calf is born dead.
Adjusted Value
No adjustments are made to calving difficulty scores.
Contemporary Group
The same contemporary group definition for birth weight should be used for calving difficulty. This includes year/season of birth, management group. Some organizations that use threshold analysis for determining calving ease EPDs will not divide calving difficulty contemporary group by sex of the calf in order to increase the number of contemporary groups with variation. If other methods for analysis are used such as random regression or a linear model, then the contemporary group should be divided by sex of calf.
Genetic Evaluation
Calving ease EPDs are produced from calving difficulty scores. They are published on a probability scale and are then the opposite of calving difficulty, such that a higher value means more ease of calving. Because the dependent variable in the genetic evaluation model is calving difficulty the translation to a probability must be performed, usually using the normal cumulative density function.
Scores of 1 through 4 are used and score 5 observations are not used because this has been shown to not be heritable and is a result of different effects than the other scores.
Models vary between organizations producing calving ease EPDs. Some groups use a threshold model method. This has the disadvantage of requiring variation in observations within the contemporary group. Thus, all data from contemporary groups with no variation are eliminated. This can cause bias in the prediction.
An alternative is to fit a random regression model, or a simple linear model, which has been shown to be sufficient and will then use the data from contemporary groups with no variation in calving difficulty.
Some analyses use calving ease observations from all ages of a female. However, in most breeds, very little variation is observed after dams reach three years or older.
Birth weight observations on all ages of dams should be fit in a multiple trait analysis with calving difficulty scores.
A maternal effect for calving difficulty should be included, and thus a maternal calving ease EPD is calculated. In most presentations of EPDs for making selection decisions, a total maternal calving ease EPD is reported along with calving ease direct: Total Maternal Calving Ease EPD = Maternal Calving Ease EPD + 1/2 Direct Calving Ease EPD. In a few evaluations of indicus-influenced breeds, the maternal is reported but not the total maternal.
Usage
Calving ease is an economically relevant trait in all production systems. However, producers often place more emphasis on calving ease than an optimal selection index would indicate is appropriate. In other words, producers often choose reduced risk (higher calving ease EPD) at the expense of profit maximization (higher index value).
