荷斯坦牛泌乳早期体细胞数对生产性能的影响及遗传参数估计

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.02.014

中国农业科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (2): 403-414.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.02.014

• 畜牧·兽医·资源昆虫 • 上一篇下一篇

荷斯坦牛泌乳早期体细胞数对生产性能的影响及遗传参数估计

竹磊^1,²(),张海亮¹,陈少侃^1,³,安涛^1,²,罗汉鹏¹,刘林⁴,黄锡霞²,王雅春¹()

¹中国农业大学动物科技学院,北京 100193
²新疆农业大学动物科学学院,乌鲁木齐 830052
³北京首农畜牧发展有限公司,北京100029
⁴北京奶牛中心,北京 100085

收稿日期:2020-12-01 接受日期:2021-07-11 出版日期:2022-01-16 发布日期:2022-01-26
通讯作者: 王雅春
作者简介:竹磊,E-mail: 936510062@qq.com。
基金资助:
现代农业(奶牛)产业技术体系建设专项资金(CARS-36);农业品种改良提升专项(2130135);长江学者和创新团队发展计划(IRT_15R62)

Impacts of Somatic Cell Count in Early Lactation on Production Performance over the Whole Lactation and Its Genetic Parameters in Holsteins Cattle

ZHU Lei^1,²(),ZHANG HaiLiang¹,CHEN ShaoKan^1,³,AN Tao^1,²,LUO HanPeng¹,LIU Lin⁴,HUANG XiXia²,WANG YaChun¹()

¹China Agricultural University College of Animal Science and Technology, Beijing 100193
²Xinjiang Agricultural University College of Animal Science, Urumqi 830052
³Beijing Sunlon Livestock Development Co., Ltd, Beijing 100029
⁴Beijing Dairy Center, Beijing 100085

Received:2020-12-01 Accepted:2021-07-11 Online:2022-01-16 Published:2022-01-26
Contact: YaChun WANG

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探究荷斯坦牛泌乳早期（6—35 d）体细胞数（SCCel）的群体特征及其与不同泌乳阶段体细胞数（SCC）及产奶量（MY）之间的关系,并对荷斯坦牛泌乳早期体细胞评分（SCSel）进行遗传参数估计,以期为我国荷斯坦牛乳房炎抗性选育提供新的思路。【方法】收集了141个牧场2008—2018年182 378头牛的2 783 046条生产性能测定记录。质控后,共得到150 864头牛的1 869 976条测定日记录。将有表型的母牛至少向上追溯三代（父母、祖父母、外祖父母）,通过追溯,获得用于遗传分析的系谱文件,共包含6 451头公牛和103 452头母牛。利用SAS软件的GLM过程分析了牧场测定规模、测定季节、测定年份、泌乳天数、胎次等因素对SCSel的影响;利用SAS软件的REG过程分别分析了SCSel与不同泌乳阶段的SCS和日产奶量之间的回归关系;基于DMU软件,使用单性状重复力动物模型、单性状动物模型和双性状动物模型分别估计了SCSel的遗传参数。【结果】荷斯坦牛产后前2周SCCel变化幅度较大,荷斯坦牛SCCel随着泌乳天数的增加呈逐渐下降的趋势;牧场规模、测定季节、胎次和泌乳天数均对SCSel有显著影响（P<0.05）,泌乳早期年均测定规模1 000头以上牧场的奶牛SCSel显著（P<0.05）低于年均测定规模1 000头以下的牧场。SCSel随胎次的增加呈先下降后上升的趋势,奶牛在夏季SCSel最高,在冬季最低。SCSel与泌乳期各测定日SCS之间均存在极显著的回归关系（P<0.01）,回归系数范围为0.06 —0.19;SCSel与泌乳期各测定日产奶量之间均存在极显著的回归关系（P<0.01）,回归系数范围为-0.46 — -0.16,泌乳早期SCSel对泌乳期乳房健康状况及生产性能均有影响。荷斯坦牛1胎、2胎、3胎及各胎次SCSel的遗传力分别为0.05 ± 0.005、0.07 ± 0.01、0.04 ± 0.01和0.03 ± 0.01,SCSel为低遗传力性状;不同胎次的SCSel性状之间存在中高遗传相关,遗传相关估计范围为0.54—0.87。【结论】荷斯坦牛泌乳早期（6 —35 d）SCC受胎次、季节等影响,泌乳早期SCC具有不同于泌乳期测定日SCC的群体特征;泌乳早期SCC处于较高水平会影响荷斯坦牛在随后整个泌乳期内的健康状态和生产性能。本研究为牧场在母牛产后利用SCCel进行差异化管理提供了理论依据,为探究荷斯坦牛在泌乳早期体细胞数差异的遗传机制奠定了基础,通过开发泌乳早期SCS新性状有助于完善我国荷斯坦牛乳房炎抗性选育。

关键词: 荷斯坦牛, 泌乳早期, 体细胞数, 产奶量, 遗传参数

Abstract:

【Objective】 The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between somatic cell count in early lactation (6-35 d) (SCCel) and test-day somatic cell count (SCC), test-day milk yield in different lactation stages, and to estimate genetic parameters of SCSel in Holstein, so as to provide a new idea for the breeding of Holstein mastitis resistance. 【Method】Dairy herd improvement (DHI) records for 182 378 Holstein cows were collected from 141 dairy farms from 2008 to 2018. After quality control, a total of 1 869 976 date records were obtained for 150 864 cattle. The pedigree information of three generations were collected (father, mother, grandfather and grandmother from both father side and mother side) to form the pedigree file, comprising a total of 6 451 bulls and 103 452 cows. The GLM process of SAS software analyzed the factors affecting SCSel, such as measurement scale of pasture, measurement season, measurement year, number of lactation days and fetal secondary, etc, and the relationships between SCSel and test-day SCS and test-day milk yield in different lactation stages by REG procedure using SAS software. The genetic parameters for SCSel traits were estimated by single trait repetition model, single trait and two traits animal model using DMU software, and including heritability and genetic correlation. 【Result】The results showed that the SCC of Holstein changed significantly at 2 weeks postpartum. SCCel of Holstein showed a trend of gradual decline with the increase of lactation days. The farm scale, parity, test season and days in milk had significant impacts on SCCel (P<0.05), and the SCSel of cows with an average annual measurement size of more than 1 000 cows in early lactation was significant lower than the average annual measured size of less than 1 000 (P<0.05). SCSel was firstly decreased and then increased with the increase of parity. The SCSel was the highest in summer and the lowest in winter. There were highly significant regression relationships between SCSel and the test-day SCS in different lactation stages (P<0.01), with regression coefficients ranging from 0.06 to 0.19. There was a highly significant regression relationships between SCSel and the test-day milk yield in different lactation stages (P<0.01), and the regression coefficient ranged from -0.46 to -0.16, and early lactation SCSel could affect breast health and performance during lactation. The heritability of SCSel in 1st, 2nd, 3rd parity and over all parity was 0.05 ± 0.005, 0.07 ± 0.01, 0.04 ± 0.01, and 0.03 ± 0.01, respectively. There were moderate to high genetic correlations among SCSel traits under different parity in Holstein, ranging from 0.54 to 0.87. 【Conclusion】The SCC of Holstein cows in early lactation (6-35 days) was affected by the number of conception and season, and the SCC of early lactation had the population characteristics different from those of the SCC of the measurement date of lactation. A high level of SCCel would have impact on the health and production performance over the whole lactation in Holstein cow. This study provided a theoretical basis for differentiated management by SCCel in postpartum cow pasture, laid a foundation for exploring the genetic mechanism of somatic cell number difference in early lactation of Holstein, and the development of new SCS traits in early lactation was helpful to improve mastitis resistance selection of Holstein in China.

Key words: Holstein, early lactation, somatic cell count, milk production, genetic parameter

竹磊,张海亮,陈少侃,安涛,罗汉鹏,刘林,黄锡霞,王雅春. 荷斯坦牛泌乳早期体细胞数对生产性能的影响及遗传参数估计[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(2): 403-414.

ZHU Lei,ZHANG HaiLiang,CHEN ShaoKan,AN Tao,LUO HanPeng,LIU Lin,HUANG XiXia,WANG YaChun. Impacts of Somatic Cell Count in Early Lactation on Production Performance over the Whole Lactation and Its Genetic Parameters in Holsteins Cattle[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55(2): 403-414.

0
/ 收藏文章 0 / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.02.014

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2022/V55/I2/403

图/表 8

图1

表1

图2

图3

表2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 30

[9]	孙宇, 牛连信, 张彦林, 高腾云. 奶牛乳体细胞数的变化规律及其与乳成分的关系. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2009, 30(6):133-134. doi: 10. 3969/j.issn.1672-5190.2009.06.075.
	SUN Y, NIU L X, ZHANG Y L, GAO T Y. Change pattern of SCC in milk of dairy cows and its relationship with milk composition. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2009, 30(6):133-134. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5190.2009.06.075. (in Chinese)
[10]	马裴裴, 俞英, 张沅, 张勤, 王雅春, 孙东晓, 张毅. 中国荷斯坦牛SCC变化规律及其与产奶性状之间的关系. 畜牧兽医学报, 2010, 41(12):1529-1535.
	MA P P, YU Y, ZHANG Y, ZHANG Q, WANG Y C, SUN D X, ZHANG Y. The distribution of SCC and its correlation with milk production traits in Chinese holsteins. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2010, 41(12):1529-1535. (in Chinese)
[11]	李春芳, 卢士宇, 赵丽梅, 周增坡, 王若丞, 马亚宾. 石家庄地区荷斯坦牛DHI指标变化规律的研究. 中国奶牛, 2019(2):60-64. doi: 10.19305/j.cnki.11-3009/s.2019.02.016.
	LI C F, LU S Y, ZHAO L M, ZHOU Z P, WANG R C, MA Y B. Study on the change rule of DHI index in Holstein Cattle in Shijiazhuang area. China Dairy Cattle, 2019(2):60-64. doi: 10.19305/j.cnki.11-3009/s.2019.02.016. (in Chinese)
[12]	曹杰. 奶牛围产期疾病数据分析及管理. 中国奶牛, 2015(6):59-60. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2015.06.016.
	CAO J. Analysis and management of perinatal disease data of cow. China Dairy Cattle, 2015(6):59-60. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2015.06.016. (in Chinese)
[13]	竹磊, 张海亮, 陈少侃, 安涛, 王炎, 王雅春, 黄锡霞. 荷斯坦牛泌乳早期体细胞数的群体特征及影响因素分析. 畜牧兽医学报, 2019, 50(11):2226-2234. doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2019.11.006.
	ZHU L, ZHANG H L, CHEN S K, AN T, WANG Y, WANG Y C, HUANG X X. Population characteristics and factors influencing somatic cell count in early lactation stage in Holstein. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2019, 50(11):2226-2234. doi: 10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2019.11.006. (in Chinese)
[14]	VLIEGHER S D, BARKEMA H W, STRYHN H, OPSOMER G, DE KRUIF A. Impact of early lactation somatic cell count in heifers on somatic cell counts over the first lactation. Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(11):3672-3682. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73506-7. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73506-7
[15]	陈振亮, 刘光磊, 王起山, 潘玉春. 基于spline曲线的南方地区荷斯坦奶牛体细胞数遗传力估计. 畜牧与兽医, 2017, 49(7):1-4.
[1]	李国江, 邹风驰, 宋文庭, 柏士江, 迟淑艳, 于洪青, 赵悦, 闵向松. 奶牛隐性乳房炎的检测与评估. 中国奶牛, 1998(3):16-17.
	LI G J, ZOU F C, SONG W T, BAI S J, CHI S Y, YU H Q, ZHAO Y, MIN X S. Detection and evaluation of recessive mastitis in cows. China Dairy Cattle, 1998(3):16-17. (in Chinese)
[2]	曹随忠, 杜立新, 吴瑞芹, 田黛君, 赵兴绪. 影响奶牛乳房炎抗性性状的贵传因素. 中国畜牧兽医, 2005, 32(1):25-27. doi: 10.3969/ j.issn.1671-7236.2005.01.008.
	CAO S Z, DU L X, WU R Q, TIAN D J, ZHAO X X. Genetic factors affecting mastitis resistance traits of dairy cows. China Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2005, 32(1):25-27. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-7236.2005.01.008. (in Chinese)
[3]	LUND T, MIGLIOR F, DEKKERS J C M, BURNSIDE E B. Genetic relationships between clinical mastitis, somatic cell count, and udder conformation in Danish Holsteins. Livestock Production Science, 1994, 39(3):243-251. doi: 10.1016/0301-6226(94)90203-8. doi: 10.1016/0301-6226(94)90203-8
[4]	王希春, 李培, 吴金节. 奶牛隐性乳房炎对牛奶中体细胞数及品质的影响. 中国奶牛, 2008(4):49-51. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2008.04.027.
	WANG X C, LI P, WU J J. Influence of recessive mastitis on somatic cell number and quality in milk. China Dairy Cattle, 2008(4):49-51. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2008.04.027. (in Chinese)
[5]	EMANUELSON U, DANELL B, PHILIPSSON J. Genetic parameters for clinical mastitis, somatic cell counts, and milk production estimated by multiple-trait restricted maximum likelihood. Journal of Dairy Science, 1988, 71(2):467-476. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79576-4. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79576-4
[6]	CENTRE I. Proceedings of the international workshop on genetic improvement of functional traits in cattle, fertility and reproduction, Grub, Germany, November 1997[C]. International Conference & Exposition on Advanced Ceramic & Composites. 1997.
[7]	DE HAAS Y, VEERKAMP R F, BARKEMA H W, GRÖHN Y T, SCHUKKEN Y H. Associations between pathogen-specific cases of clinical mastitis and somatic cell count patterns. Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(1):95-105. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73146-X. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73146-X
[8]	VLIEGHER S D, LAEVENS H, BARKEMA H W, DOHOO I R, STRYHN H, OPSOMER G, DE KRUIF A. Management practices and heifer characteristics associated with early lactation somatic cell count of Belgian dairy heifers. Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(4):937-947. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73238-5. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73238-5
[15]	CHEN Z L, LIU G L, WANG Q S, PAN Y C. Heritability estimation of dairy cows using optimal spline curves in southern area of China. Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2017, 49(7):1-4. (in Chinese)
[16]	SHOOK G E. Approaches to summarizing somatic cell count which improve interpretability Proceedings 21st Annual Meeting, 1982, National Mastitis Council. 1982: 150-166.
[17]	MADSEN P, JENSEN J. A Use’s guide to DMU[S]. Denmark, 2013.
[18]	张海平, 王海燕, 高鹏, 张静, 梁秀珍, 葛武鹏. 宁夏产区荷斯坦牛乳体细胞数及乳成分影响因素. 乳业科学与技术, 2019, 42(2):7-12. doi: 10.15922/j.cnki.jdst.2019.02.002.
	ZHANG H P, WANG H Y, GAO P, ZHANG J, LIANG X Z, GE W P. Analysis of factors affecting somatic cell counts and milk composition of Chinese Holstein cows in ningxia. Journal of Dairy Science and Technology, 2019, 42(2):7-12. doi: 10.15922/j.cnki.jdst.2019.02.002. (in Chinese)
[19]	SCHUKKEN Y H, WILSON D J, WELCOME F, GARRISON- TIKOFSKY L, GONZALEZ R N. Monitoring udder health and milk quality using somatic cell counts. Veterinary Research, 2003, 34(5):579-596. doi: 10.1051/vetres:2003028. doi: 10.1051/vetres:2003028
[20]	陈连民, 陈前岭, 王梦芝. 牛奶体细胞数的影响因素及其调控技术. 饲料工业, 2015, 36(7):15-19. doi: 10.13302/j.cnki.fi.2015.07.004.
	CHEN L M, CHEN Q L, WANG M Z. Progression of factors affecting somatic cell count and its regulatory techniques. Feed Industry, 2015, 36(7):15-19. doi: 10.13302/j.cnki.fi.2015.07.004. (in Chinese)
[21]	SCHEPERS A J, LAM T J G M, SCHUKKEN Y H, WILMINK J B M, HANEKAMP W J A. Estimation of variance components for somatic cell counts to determine thresholds for uninfected quarters. Journal of Dairy Science, 1997, 80(8):1833-1840. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76118-6. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76118-6
[22]	郭家中, 刘小林, 徐阿娟, 夏志. 奶牛体细胞评分的变化规律研究. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2010, 38(6):67-70. doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2010.06.034.
	GUO J Z, LIU X L, XU A J, XIA Z. Study on the variation of somatic cell score (SCS) in dairy cattle. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Natural Science Edition), 2010, 38(6):67-70. doi: 10. 13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2010.06.034. (in Chinese)
[23]	王相根, 胡书梅, 汪聪勇. 奶牛体细胞数(SCC)和隐性乳房炎变化规律的统计调查. 中国奶牛, 2012(14):49-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2012.14.022.
	WANG X G, HU S M, WANG C Y. Statistical investigation on the change rule of SCC and recessive Mastitis in dairy cows. China Dairy Cattle, 2012(14):49-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2012.14.022. (in Chinese)
[24]	张峥臻, 张瑞华, 张克春. 上海地区奶牛场牛奶体细胞数与产奶量及乳成分关系的研究. 中国奶牛, 2014(6):49-52. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2014.06.015.
	ZHANG Z Z, ZHANG R H, ZHANG K C. Relationship of somatic cell count with milk yield and composition in Chinese Holstein population from a dairy farm of Shanghai. China Dairy Cattle, 2014(6):49-52. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2014.06.015. (in Chinese)
[25]	VLIEGHER S D, BARKEMA H W, STRYHN H, OPSOMER G, DE KRUIF A. Impact of early lactation somatic cell count in heifers on milk yield over the first lactation. Journal of Dairy Science, 2005, 88(3):938-947. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72761-2. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72761-2
[26]	DI MARZO L, WOJCIECHOWSKI K L, BARBANO D M. Preparation and stability of milk somatic cell reference materials. Journal of Dairy Science, 2016, 99(9):7679-7689. doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-10848. doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-10848
[27]	毛杰, 王根林, 余盼, 张琨, 刘光磊, 陈振亮, 潘玉春. 上海地区荷斯坦奶牛体型性状、产奶性状和体细胞评分的遗传统计分析. 南京农业大学学报, 2015, 38(4):650-655. doi: 10.7685/j.issn.1000-2030.2015.04.019.
	MAO J, WANG G L, YU P, ZHANG K, LIU G L, CHEN Z L, PAN Y C. Genetic and statistical analysis between type traits, milk production traits and somatic cell score of Holstein cattle in Shanghai. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2015, 38(4):650-655. doi: 10.7685/j.issn.1000-2030.2015.04.019. (in Chinese)
[28]	KONSTANTINOV K V, BEARD K T, GODDARD M E, VAN DER WERF J H J. Genetic evaluation of Australian dairy cattle for somatic cell scores using multi-trait random regression test-day model. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 2009, 126(3):209-215. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0388.2008.00762.x. doi: 10.1111/jbg.2009.126.issue-3
[29]	任小丽, 栗敏杰, 白雪利, 李静茹, 王雅春, 闫磊, 闫跃飞, 苏银池, 张震. 中国荷斯坦牛头胎产奶量和乳成分遗传参数估计. 中国畜牧杂志, 2019, 55(7):67-70. doi: 10.19556/j.0258-7033.2019-07-067.
	REN X L, LI M J, BAI X L, LI J R, WANG Y C, YAN L, YAN Y F, SU Y C, ZHANG Z. Genetic parameters for test-day milk yield and milk composition in Chinese Holstein first parity. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2019, 55(7):67-70. doi: 10.19556/j.0258-7033.2019-07-067. (in Chinese)
[30]	CASTILLO-JUAREZ H, OLTENACU P A, CIENFUEGOS-RIVAS E G. Genetic and phenotypic relationships among milk production and composition traits in primiparous Holstein cows in two different herd environments. Livestock Production Science, 2002, 78(3):223-231. doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00098-2. doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00098-2

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

145

HTML			PDF

Just accepted	Online first	Issue	Just accepted	Online first	Issue
0	0	27	0	0	118

From	Others	local

Times	33	112
Rate	23%	77%

Abstract

452

Just accepted	Online first	Issue

0	0	452

From	Others	local

Times	393	59
Rate	87%	13%

Cited

Web of Science	Crossref	ScienceDirect	Search for Citations in Google Scholar >>


This page requires you have already subscribed to WoS.

Shared

效应 Effect	水平 Level	数据量N	最小二乘均值 ± 标准误 LSM ± SE
年牧场测定规模（头） Herd yearly test scale (cow)	200—500	62 809	2.87 ± 0.01a
	501—1000	74 450	2.89 ± 0.01a
	≥1001	36 787	2.61 ± 0.01b
胎次 Parity	1胎Parity1	83 363	2.87 ± 0.01a
	2胎Parity2	29 832	2.65 ± 0.01b
	3胎 Parity3	60 851	2.85 ± 0.01a
测定季节 Test season	春季 Spring	43 587	2.73 ± 0.01b
	夏季 Summer	45 278	3.10 ± 0.01a
	秋季 Autumn	39 966	2.70 ± 0.01b
	冬季 Winter	45 215	2.64 ± 0.01c

变量 Variables	36—65 d		66—95 d		96—125 d
数据量 N	139 018		140 059		138 406
数据量 N	参数估计值Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value
Intercept	2.31 ± 0.02	<0.01	2.31 ± 0.02	<0.01	2.37 ± 0.02	<0.01
SCSel	0.19 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.16 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.13 ± 0.00	<0.01
DIMel	0.003 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.003 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.003 ± 0.00	<0.01
1胎Parity1	Ref		Ref		Ref
2胎Parity2	0.16 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.17 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.22 ± 0.01	<0.01
3胎 Parity3	0.31 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.34 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.38 ± 0.01	<0.01
变量 Variables	126—155 d		156—185 d		186—215 d
数据量 N	133 851		128 790		126 002
数据量 N	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value
Intercept	2.47 ± 0.02	<0.01	2.54 ± 0.02	<0.01	2.65 ± 0.02	<0.01
SCSel	0.11 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.10 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.10 ± 0.00	<0.01
DIMel	0.003 ± 0.000	<0.01	0.002 ± 0.000	<0.01	0.003 ± 0.000	<0.01
1胎Parity1	Ref		Ref		Ref
2胎Parity2	0.19 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.23 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.31 ± 0.01	<0.01
3胎 Parity3	0.43 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.44 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.51 ± 0.01	<0.01
变量 Variables	216—245 d		246—275 d		275—305 d
数据量 N	122 628		114 772		90 192
数据量 N	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value
Intercept	2.66 ± 0.02	<0.01	2.75 ± 0.02	<0.01	2.90 ± 0.02	<0.01
SCSel	0.08 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.07 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.06 ± 0.02	<0.01
DIMel	0.002 ± 0.000	<0.01	0.002 ± 0.000	<0.01	0.001 ± 0.000	<0.01
1胎Parity1	Ref		Ref		Ref
2胎Parity2	0.33 ± 0.00	<0.01	0.40 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.44 ± 0.01	<0.01
3胎 Parity3	0.56 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.61 ± 0.01	<0.01	0.66 ± 0.01	<0.01

变量 Variables	36—65 d		66—95 d		96—125 d
数据量 N	139 018		140 059		138 406
数据量 N	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value
Intercept	34.59 ± 0.10	<0.01	36.28 ± 0.09	<0.01	35.97 ± 0.09	<0.01
SCSel	-0.46 ± 0.02	<0.01	-0.41 ± 0.02	<0.01	-0.31 ± 0.02	<0.01
DIMel	0.02 ± 0.00	<0.01	-0.03 ± 0.00	<0.01	-0.03 ± 0.00	<0.01
1胎Parity1	Ref		Ref		Ref
2胎Parity2	8.21 ± 0.05	<0.01	6.87 ± 0.05	<0.01	5.25 ± 0.05	<0.01
3胎 Parity3	7.88 ± 0.07	<0.01	6.52 ± 0.07	<0.01	5.15 ± 0.06	<0.01
变量 Variables	126—155 d		156—185 d		186—215 d
数据量 N	133 851		128 790		126 002
数据量 N	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value
Intercept	35.52 ± 0.09	<0.01	34.66 ± 0.09	<0.01	33.69 ± 0.09	<0.01
SCSel	-0.31 ± 0.02	<0.01	-0.27 ± 0.02	<0.01	-0.25 ± 0.02	<0.01
DIMel	-0.04 ± 0.00	<0.01	-0.03 ± 0.00	<0.01	-0.03 ± 0.00	<0.01
1胎 Parity1	Ref		Ref		Ref
2胎 Parity2	3.81 ± 0.05	<0.01	2.10 ± 0.05	<0.01	0.66 ± 0.05	<0.01
3胎 Parity3	3.72 ± 0.06	<0.01	1.90 ± 0.06	<0.01	0.30 ± 0.06	<0.01
变量 Variables	216—245 d		246—275 d		275—305 d
数据量 N	122 628		114 772		90 192
数据量 N	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value	参数估计值 Parameter	P值 P value
Intercept	32.72 ± 0.09	<0.01	31.42 ± 0.09	<0.01	30.07 ± 0.10	<0.01
SCSel	-0.21 ± 0.02	<0.01	-0.16 ± 0.02	<0.01	-0.16 ± 0.02	<0.01
DIMel	-0.03 ± 0.00	<0.01	-0.03 ± 0.00	<0.01	-0.02 ± 0.00	<0.01
1胎Parity1	Ref		Ref		Ref
2胎Parity2	-0.88 ± 0.05	<0.01	-2.06 ± 0.05	<0.01	-2.77 ± 0.06	<0.01
3胎 Parity3	-1.25 ± 0.07	<0.01	-2.63 ± 0.07	<0.01	-2.57 ± 0.08	<0.01

性状 Traits	加性遗传方差 Additive variance	永久环境方差 Permanent environment variance	残差方差 Residual variance	遗传力 Heritability	遗传力标准误 Standard error
SCSel	0.12	0.79	1.45	0.05	0.005
SCSel (1胎Parity1)	0.15	-	2.01	0.07	0.01
SCSel (2胎Parity2)	0.09	-	2.33	0.04	0.01
SCSel (3胎 Parity3)	0.06	-	2.31	0.03	0.01

性状 Trait	SCSel (1胎 Parity 1)	SCSel (2胎 Parity 2)	SCSel (3胎 Parity 3)
SCSel (1胎Parity1)		0.07	0.04
SCSel (2胎Parity2)	0.70 ± 0.10		0.10
SCSel (3胎 Parity3)	0.54 ± 0.19	0.87 ± 0.17

荷斯坦牛泌乳早期体细胞数对生产性能的影响及遗传参数估计

Impacts of Somatic Cell Count in Early Lactation on Production Performance over the Whole Lactation and Its Genetic Parameters in Holsteins Cattle

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 30

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	王凯,张海亮,董祎鑫,陈少侃,郭刚,刘林,王雅春. 基于牧场管理数据的奶牛健康性状定义及遗传参数估计[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(6): 1227-1240.
[2]	董明明,赵番番,葛建军,赵俊亮,王丹,胥磊,张梦华,种丽伟,黄锡霞,王雅春. 新疆地区荷斯坦牛长寿性与产奶量的遗传力估计及相关性分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(21): 4294-4303.
[3]	夏予馨,梁艳,王海洋,郭梦玲,周部,代旭,杨章平,毛永江. 荷斯坦牛头胎患隐性乳房炎次数和乳中体细胞评分对2胎体细胞评分的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(20): 4052-4064.
[4]	华伟毅,刘义明,徐飞,路永强,孔梅,王海挺,黄慧丽,王宏磊,吴连勇,李秀波. 奶牛用头孢洛宁乳房注入剂（干乳期）的安全性评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(2): 359-366.
[5]	张剑搏，袁超，岳耀敬，郭健，牛春娥，王喜军，王丽娟，吕会芹，杨博辉. 不同动物模型对高山美利奴羊早期生长性状遗传参数估计的比较[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(6): 1202-1212.
[6]	胡丽蓉，康玲，王淑慧，李玮，鄢新义，罗汉鹏，董刚辉，王新宇，王雅春，徐青. 冷热应激对北京地区荷斯坦牛产奶性能及血液生化指标的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(19): 3791-3799.
[7]	李学武，刘燕，王瑞军，王志英，娜清，李宏伟，王振宇，徐冰冰，苏蕊，张燕军，刘志红，李金泉. 内蒙古绒山羊不同毛被类型产绒量和体重的遗传参数估计[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(12): 2410-2417.
[8]	王晓，张勤，俞英. 基于体细胞评分的中国荷斯坦牛乳房炎抗性全基因组关联分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(4): 755-763.
[9]	王梦琦，倪炜，张慧敏，杨章平，王西朴，蒋彦森，毛永江. 中国荷斯坦牛CXCR1基因编码区SNP多态与临床乳房炎和生产寿命的关联分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(12): 2359-2370.
[10]	任小丽，刘澳星，李想，张旭，王雅春，邵怀峰，秦春华，王瑜，温万，张胜利. 用随机回归模型估计宁夏地区荷斯坦牛头胎测定日产奶量遗传参数[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(10): 1885-1892.
[11]	吴彤，张道康，刘茂林，黄慧丽，张宁，徐飞，刘义明. 硫酸头孢喹肟乳房注入剂（干乳期）对奶牛安全性的研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(20): 4040-4046.
[12]	田月珍，冯文，王雅春，黄锡霞，俞英. 新疆褐牛乳中体细胞数与产奶性状的影响因素分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(12): 2437-2448.
[13]	徐晨希，王梦琦，朱小瑞，张玉锋，夏海磊，刘贤慧，王小龙，张慧敏，杨章平，毛永江. 中国荷斯坦牛FADS2基因3′端SNP突变对乳中脂肪酸组成的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(11): 2194-2202.
[14]	王小龙, 常玲玲, 陈莹, 陈仁金, 李云龙, 毛永江, 冀德君, 杨章平. 中国荷斯坦牛SCD1外显子5基因多态性及其对乳中脂肪酸组成的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(9): 1858-1864.
[15]	任小丽1, 张旭1, 王雅春1, 吴宏军2, 刘爱荣3, 张毅1, 王东升2, 崔久辉3, 窦同喜2, 袁鹏2, 姜立鑫2, 周磊2, 赵健2. 三河牛初生体尺和初生重遗传参数的估计[J]. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(23): 5020-5025.