Duration: 10/01/2008 to 09/30/2013

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

Food production, particularly beef, in the United States is transitioning from a loose commodity-based system to a system that allows "buyer choice" based on knowledge of production or measures of quality. This knowledge of production or quality is derived from the label. In the Western United States, this type of beef production is greatly challenged as lands and forages are highly variable requiring cows with different genetic potentials for optimum production. Thus, the product is not uniform. Furthermore, the industry continues with a segmented infrastructure making genetic improvement a very complex issue. Genetic improvement tools for beef production have adapted with the dynamics of this industry. They were initiated with crossbreeding and performance testing programs that expanded to genetic prediction technologies, which included multi-breed evaluations. Researchers and breeders are now developing models which incorporate molecular markers into genetic prediction technologies.

The multi-decade history of this committee (WERA1) reveals that its activities impacted genetic improvement of beef cattle in the Western Region of the United States, nationally, and internationally. In the last petition, the committees purpose/goal was to develop improved methods of genetic improvement using the latest quantitative and molecular techniques to increase the probability of making economically-sound breeding decisions and to disseminate the new information to the industry. The committee needs to continue to strive to achieve this goal as the subject matter is substantial and dynamic. Achieving the goal will only come through the evolution of research and continued testing of its outputs within varied production scenarios. Dissemination of these results through educational efforts is greatly needed for the industry to actually realize the impact of the new tools on genetic improvement. The concept of new tools in beef cattle breeding, such as molecular markers, marker assisted evaluations, and marker assisted selection have been introduced, but many of the tools still require substantial research, development, and educational effort before breeders can adopt and realize a measurable change in their rate of genetic improvement.

The membership in this committee includes an important expertise-balance of quantitative with molecular geneticists that can collaborate and share resources as they strive to achieve their goal. This is an important change within the committee as the historic members were primarily quantitative geneticists. Thus, the committee is evolving within the discipline of breeding and genetics and has the ability to pursue the mission for effort in agriculture animal genomics recently described by the USDA Animal Genomics Strategic Planning Task Force (Green et al., 2007). The beef industry in the Western United States will benefit greatly from activities of this committee through ecologically-sound production systems that are economically viable.

Objectives

Procedures and Activities

WERA1 (W-1, WRCC-1, and WCC-1 in previous years) has a multi-decade history of collaborative research and efforts to relay scientific information to the beef industry. Examples of this work can be viewed on the committees website with much more information presented in the committees annual report. These citations are voluminous, so the committee wants to point-out that it also puts-forth considerable service effort to breed associations, which includes activity within the organization known as the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF). These efforts include educational presentations as well as membership and consultation to Breed Improvement Committees. The WERA1 group will continue this effort to achieve objective 1. The relationships established by WERA1 allows for the committee members to interact and prepare for presentation of technical knowledge to producer organizations. An example of such an activity, is the program titled Incorporating Every Tool Every Time for the International Brangus Breeders Association  Breed Improvement Committee being formulated by Drs. Thomas (NM) and Herring (TX) for their fall meeting in 2007. Another examples includes use of data from the Red Angus Association of America to improve the tools for National Cattle Evaluation (Garrick et al., 2007). Similar efforts have occurred for the Canadian Charolais and Hereford associations and the Olds College Bull test group.

In order to describe how the Procedures and Activities of this petition achieve Objectives 2 through 4, one must understand the operational definition of the word phenomics. Specifically, phenomics means: the study of optimum phenotypes for animals to elucidate information from genomics research, and gene discovery, and for use with quantitative methodologies for the design and implementation of genetic improvement programs. Researchers must address all of these facets of animal breeding to conduct successful phenomics research. In lay terms, researchers must have or have access to: useful cattle resource populations, performance data collected from the cattle, DNA from the cattle, and the statistical ability to conduct analyses involving the phenotypic data as well as the genotypic data. The coordinated efforts of the committee compiles a more comprehensive range of the required resources and expertise for leading-edge phenomics research than can be provided by any one member. During the time frame of the previous petition, the group started a database to support phenomics. This database can be viewed on the website. Objective 2 will be achieved by maintaining and growing this database as well as the research activities of several committee members.

Recent examples of the committees ability to achieve Objective 3 (i.e., Integrate quantitative and molecular research tools that contribute to the understanding of genetic associations among economically important traits and their indicators) are the publications of Thomas et al. (2007), Van Ennenman et al. (2007), Rumph et al. (2007), and Crews et al. (2007). These are publications that demonstrate that a team of scientists are needed to produce results when the subject becomes very complex, such as research involving phenomics. Even though the group produced these multi-disciplinary publications in 2007 under the scope of the previous petition, this is a new objective and demonstrates that committee members understand the need to conduct interdisciplinary and multi-institutional research. Most importantly, these publications demonstrate the willingness of the committee members to work as a team. The data included within the scope of this objective is growing exponentially. This growth will accelerate with the impending publication of the bovine hapmap and the SNPs associated with that genomics project. Exciting as the release of these types of data are to the scientific community, implementation of these molecular data into genetic improvement programs are dependent on the ability of quantitative geneticist to incorporate them into genetic prediction methodologies. This subject is at the forefront of the subject of animal genomics and genetic evaluation. Because of the resources/expertise from the combined committee members, the members will be able to conduct collaborative research to further elucidate the monumental challenge of how to use the associations of genotype to phenotype in genetic prediction. The optimal integration of genomics tools such as SNP genotypes and haplotypes with phenotypic and pedigree data, which largely arises from collaborations within the committee, will lead to the next-generation of marker-assisted genetic prediction models. Maintaining databases which allow for investigation of the synergy between molecular tools and phenotypic data will lead to valuable insight not only into advanced genetic prediction models with higher information density, but also into potentially important gene × gene (e.g., dominance and epistasis effects) and gene × environment interactions, as well as providing a resource for measuring the longer term impact of marker- and gene-selection on phenotypic performance. These concepts and resources are key to understanding how to optimize single-gene with polygenic selection, and is a more comprehensive and sustainable approach than strictly limiting genetic improvement tools to either a quantitative or genomic basis alone. Further, the work of the committee in the phenomics and genetic prediction areas will be well positioned to take advantage of the newest advances arising from high-density, whole-genome selection strategies (e.g., Meuwissen et al., 2001), but also furthering those concepts with appropriate phenotypic and quantitative resources and expertise in order to ensure industry adoption and benefit.

Working to achieve Objective 4 has been one of the most viable rationale for the existence of this committee. Even though this paragraph appears reiterative, it is important to state that: exchange of information will occur among committee members who are knowledgeable and informed of other members activities will facilitate cooperative efforts in research. Given the recent turnover in committee membership due to retirement and faculty moves, developing these relationships is essential to successful phenomics research. Most importantly, the interactions of the group will foster pooling of resources, more efficient use of resources, and most importantly enhanced productivity of the committee members. Cumulatively, the beef industry in the Western United States and its academic resources are strong and accessible. The premier strength and success of the committee has arisen from discussion and collaboration among its members throughout its multi-decade history.

Expected Outcomes and Impacts

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Educational Plan

The W-1, WRCC-1, and WCC-1 committees have historically been very active in extending scientific information regarding the understanding of beef cattle selection and genetics to livestock producers. This committee plans to continue this great tradition while expanding its educational activities to be very competitive on a global basis. This committee has experience with this type of educational activity as many of its members work closely with international beef cattle breed associations. Collaboration stemming from this committee has also led to previous coordinated graduate education efforts in animal breeding and genetics (Herring et al., 2001). Example of involvement in industry organizations includes International Brangus Breeders Association, Canadian Charolais and Hereford associations, Red Angus Association of America and numerous international research and producer groups. The WERA-1 committee will continue to welcome and include industry members in its annual meetings, such as the Red Angus Association of America. The members of this committee continue to be diligent in getting information to producers through popular press outlets and producer field days in their respective states. It should also be noted that several members of this committee have extension appointments and that the committee as a whole strives to achieve missions of the land grant university system, which is to share the technical information generated from research with students and beef producers.

Members of this committee have large impacts in the education of both undergraduate and graduate students through animal breeding and genetics courses and beef cattle production courses in the western half of the United States (Table 1). Two members of this committee (Enns and Rumph) have recently been awarded a USDA Challenge grant to develop graduate-level animal breeding education modules. WERA-1 committee members will be involved in development of these modules. Development of beef cattle breeding modules that could be packaged for undergraduates and/or producers, especially in other countries (i.e., a Spanish version), could be an objective in future petitions.

Table 1. Description of undergraduate and graduate course in Animal Breeding taught by members of WERA-1.


Institution Academic Level Course # Smstrs taught # Students *year-1
Cal Poly Pomona Undergraduate 404/404a Fall, Spring, Summer 150
Colorado St U Undergraduate 330 Spring 45
Colorado St U Graduate 631 Alt. Spring 8
Montana St U Undergraduate 322 Spring 35
Montana St U Graduate 524 Alt. Spring 2
New Mexico St Undergraduate 423 Fall 45
Texas A&M U Undergraduate 305 Spring/Fall/Summer 240
Univ of Alberta Undergraduate 385 Spring 25
Univ of NV Reno Undergraduate 425 Spring 18
Univ of NV Reno Graduate 625 Alt. Fall 7
Univ of Wyoming Undergraduate 4540 Fall 35
Washington St U Undergraduate 330 Spring 60

Organization/Governance

Before the conclusion of each annual meeting, a chairman, host, and recording secretary are elected for the next meeting. There are no duplication of duties within a year. There is also an alphabetical list of both the host institution and the institution which will provide the chairman. This list is followed except when the committee votes to hold the meeting in a location not associated with one of the participating institutions. Examples of this deviation include holding the meeting in conjunction with the Beef Improvement Federation or the Western Section of the American Society of Animal Science. The only budget requested for this committee is that the experiment station directors of the states from which members originate support the travel of specified representatives and the administrative advisor to attend annual meetings.

Literature Cited

Crews, D. H., Jr., R. M. Enns, J. M. Rumph, and E. J. Pollak. 2007. Genetic evaluation of retail product percentage in Simmental cattle. J. Anim. Breed. Gen. In Press.
Green, R.D. et al. 2007. Blueprint for USDA efforts in Agricultural Animal Genomics 2008-2017 (USDA XXX: in press).
Herring, A. D., M. G. Thomas, and R. M. Enns. 2001. Development of a multi-institutional, web-based, graduate animal breeding course. NACTA Journal. 44:11-17.
Meuwissen, T. H. E., B. J. Hayes, and M. E. Goddard. 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157:1819-1829.
Rump, JM, W.R. Schafer, D.H. Crews, R.M. Enns, R.J. Lipsey, R.L. Quaas, and E.J. Pollak. 2007. Genetic evaluation of beef data using different endpoint adjustments. J. Anim. Sci. 85:1120-1125.
Garrick, D.J., B.W. Brigham, and S.E. Speidel. 2007. Iterative solution of linear equations from National Beef Cattle Evaluation. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 58:89-92.
Thomas, M.G., R.M. Enns, K.L. Shirley, M.D. Garcia, A.J. Garrett, and G.A. Silver. 2007. Associations of DNA polymorphisms in growth hormone and its transcriptional regulators with growth and carcass traits in two populations of Brangus bulls. Genet. Mol. Res. 6:222-237.
Van Eenennaam, A.L., J. Li, R.M. Thallman, R.L. Quaas, M.E. Dikeman, C.A. Gill, D.E. Franke, and M.G. Thomas. 2007. Validation of commercial DNA tests for quantitative beef quality traits. J. Anim. Sci. 85:891-900.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

AZ, CO, SD, TX, WA

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

American Simmental Association, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, Red Angus Association of America