oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Short communication: evaluation of bovine milk residues from routine milk testing programs as DNA source for genotyping
Research Unit Molecular Biology, Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology, Dummerstorf, Germany .
Chair of Animal Breeding, Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany.
Research Unit Genetics and Biometry, Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology, Dummerstorf, Germany.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7173-5579
Chair of Animal Breeding, Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany.
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Journal of Dairy Science, ISSN 0022-0302, E-ISSN 1525-3198, Vol. 95, no 9, p. 5436-41Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Genome-wide association studies and genomic evaluation using a dense set of genetic markers both require a large number of genotyped individuals. Collection of the respective samples contributes substantially to the cost of the approach. In dairy cattle research, the use of residues from routine milk recording would be a cost-saving alternative to obtain samples for an appropriate number of individuals with specific phenotypes in a very short time. To assess the suitability of milk recording residues, we concurrently investigated milk residues obtained after standardized milk recording procedures and blood samples from 115 cows originating from 3 farms with different milking systems by genotyping 15 microsatellite markers. We found that 4% of the milk samples were possibly assigned to the wrong animal (i.e., conflicts) and that at least 27% of the milk residues were contaminated, as indicated by an extra allele not present in the blood sample. These additional alleles primarily originated from a sample with a higher somatic cell score that went through the milk sample analyzer in the milk laboratory before the target sample. Furthermore, additional allele carryover was observed across more than one sample, when the difference in somatic cell count between samples exceeded 100,000 cells/mL. Finally, in several samples, the extra allele could not be traced back to previous samples passing through the milk sample analyzer. One source of those contaminations might be sample collection on-farm due to milk traces from the previously milked cow in the hose. No correlation was found between the farm management and conflicts or contaminations. We conclude that residues from routine milk recording are not suitable for genomic evaluation or genome-wide association studies because of the high prevalence of contamination generated at several steps during the collection and processing of milk residual samples.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
New York, USA: Elsevier, 2012. Vol. 95, no 9, p. 5436-41
Keywords [en]
lactation, genomic evaluation, genome-wide association study, milk residual sample
National Category
Genetics and Breeding
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-40737DOI: 10.3168/jds.2011-5259ISI: 000307623200074PubMedID: 22916950Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84865316615OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-40737DiVA, id: diva2:778570
Available from: 2015-01-11 Created: 2015-01-11 Last updated: 2018-08-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Repsilber, Dirk

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Repsilber, Dirk
In the same journal
Journal of Dairy Science
Genetics and Breeding

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 620 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf