Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Similar to Developing innovative digital technology and genomic approaches to livestock genetic improvement in developing countries(20)

Advertisement

More from ILRI(20)

Advertisement

Developing innovative digital technology and genomic approaches to livestock genetic improvement in developing countries

  1. Developing innovative digital technology and genomic approaches to livestock genetic improvement in developing countries Raphael Mrode, Julie Ojango, John Gibson and Okeyo Mwai 12th World Conference on Animal Production (WCAP) Vancouver, Canada, 5-8 July 2018
  2. Structure of most genetic Improvement Program in developed countries Data Collection and storage (PI) Analytical tools (PPP) Breeding Programs or Delivery of appropriate genetics to farmers (PI) Herd management information Genetic evaluations Farmers Foreign Genetics Good Foundation for sustainability or continuous genetic progress
  3. Structure of most genetic Improvement Program in developing countries Breeding Programs or Delivery of appropriate genetics to farmers (PI) Farmers Foreign Genetics Indigenous breeds or crosses No Foundation for sustainability or continuous genetic progress No Training No feedback
  4. 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Harsh Poor Good Yield(l) Production environment Indigenous X-bred Exotic Indigenous (non-dairy) breeds: highly adapted to harsh conditions; little potential to increase milk yield under better feeding. Crossbreds: Already exist in lager numbers & respond to better feeding with increased milk yield; moderately well adapted. Exotic dairy breeds: very high genetic potential for milk yield which is NOT expressed under the most favourable conditions; poorly adapted Typical low-input smallholder environment Success comes from appropriately matching the genetic potential with production environments, (physical, management and markets)
  5. What Challenges are being addressed by ADGG? little or no systematic and sustainable breeding programs limited access to the dairy genetics or breed type that best suit the different production systems Farmers do not have access to various services, esp. AI & health, and inputs necessary to support sustained productivity improvement Inadequate access to input & market services access to information or farmer education and training services lacking so cant improve herd productivity and system profitability
  6. What is ADGG Platform for African Dairy Genetic Gains (ADGG) is a multi-country, multi-institution ILRI-led pioneering proof of concept which is: developing and testing a multi-country genetic gains platform that uses on-farm performance information and basic genomic data for identifying and proving superior crossbred bulls for AI delivery and planned natural mating for the benefit of smallholder farmers in Africa
  7. ADGG: Approach and Objectives Innovative application of existing & emerging technologies 1. To establish National Dairy Performance Recording Centers (DPRCs) for herd and cow data collection, synthesis, genetic evaluation and timely farmer-feedbacks 2. To develop & pilot an ICT platform (FFIP) to capture herd, cow level & other related data & link it to DPRCs (feeds back key related herd/cow summaries, dairy extension & market info. etc.). 3. To develop low density genomic chip for breed composition determination & related bull certification systems for crossbred bulls
  8. Pr o d uc ti vi ty Optimize Realized Productivity for farmers + Smart application of Genomic tools Engagement (PPP & Capacity development) Effective phenotyping Dairy cattle: Innovative application of Genomics & ICT thro PPPs
  9. Cow Calendar AI/Animal Health Technician Genomic chip Increased efficiency and profitability Platform Platform
  10. Detailed data DB (cleaned) Hand- held gadget Error Log Data querying Analytics Samples R P y F Field staff Consultation Analyzed data/samples DB (results per script) Visualized results etc.) Further Data cleaning PPP Feedback Farmers Other scientists External AccessOther primary data (e.g., service providers) Clear MTAs are key!Clear MTAs are key!
  11. What data is being collected? • Milk yield (litres on test-day basis) & milking frequency • Lactation length (derived) • Calving interval (derived) • Birth weight • Calf/heifer growth (weight for age) • Survival to different age (derived) • AFC (derived) • Lactation number • Type and incidence of disease, interventions/treatment & costs • Body condition score on the test –day • Teat and udder type scores, including disorders • Behavioral (movement/rumination) tracking in association estrus detection • Milk composition (provided for but not being measured now) • Fat % • Protein % • Urea (mg/dl) • Lactose % • Somatic cell count (cells/ml) The above are being used to develop breeding objectives
  12. Some results
  13. Tanzania sites Ethiopia sites
  14. • Metabase (http://metabase.data.ilri.org/ dashboards) • Summaries prepared on basis of request from each partner
  15. Raw statistics on test-Day milk records from Tanzania Row Labels Total number of TD Records Avg Test-Day milk ± SD Max TD-Milk Min TD- Milk Number of animals with TD Records Arusha 5103 7.27±3.49 25 0.5 1624 Iringa 2322 5.99±2.71 20 0.5 817 Kilimanjaro 5325 6.57±4.06 28 0.5 2050 Mbeya 6377 9.51±4.41 30 1 2260 Morogoro 1 9.00 9 9 1 Njombe 3225 10.06±4.00 28 0.5 1016 Tanga 5837 6.23±3.76 25 0.5 2178 Grand Total 28190 7.64±4.18 30 0.5 9946
  16. Data collection - Sustainability • Several options are being explored • Training individuals to undertake a bundle of services: • AI services, supply inputs to farmers and data collection or verification • Easy to use phone based ICT tools • farmers can use to input data. Data is only verified by personnel providing bundle services occasionally during farm visits. • well supported with very good feedback that farmers can see benefits of data collection
  17. Characteristics of genomic data in small holder systems • Genotyping activities undertaken as a result of research project or breed associations • Challenges: • Number of genotyped animals are few and are mostly females • Reference are mostly females but a few males in some occasions • Very difficult to clearly define data sets for validation and therefore these are created either by random or structured sampling • Mostly on cross breeds animals
  18. Characteristics of genomic data in small holder systems • Opportunities: • Genotypes on cross breed animals • Explore novel methods adapted to the data structure • Plurality of Bayesian methods have been examined
  19. Quick wins from genomics in small holder systems • With lack of systematic data and pedigree, quick wins from genotypic data includes • Reduces the need for accurate pedigree recording as genomic relationship can easily be computed • Parentage discovery using SNP data • Determining breed composition • Future use in traceability of animal products
  20. Experimenting with DGEA data • Examine genomic prediction using the DGEA small holder data • Phenotypes were milk yield deviations on 1034 cows (Kenya) with HD genotypes • Exotic breeds were Friesian, Holstein, Guernsey, Jersey and Ayrshires and indigenous breeds : Nellore, Zebu • Four classes of animals created: cows with > 87.5%, 61−87.5%, 36−60%, and < 36% exotic breed genes.
  21. Classification of cows by breed composition Dairy% Breedtype Dairy%by-Breedtype 1 (0-20%) Zebu 6 1 2 (0.33-35%) Mixed + Zebu 6 2 3 (36-60%) Ayr/Gue/Jer 1 3 3 Fri 2 4 3 Mixed + Zebu 6 5 4 (61-87.5%) Ayr 1 6 4 Fri 2 7 4 Ayr/Fri 3 8 4 Gue/Fri 4 9 4 Ayr/Gue/Fri 5 10 4 Mixed + Zebu 6 11 5(>87.5%) Ayr 1 12 5 Fri 2 13 5 Ayr/Fri 3 14 5 Gue/Fri 4 15 5 Gue/Fri/Ayr 5 16
  22. Developing a low density SNP Chip for breed composition • Low density snp assay can be developed that gives accurate estimates of dairy proportion
  23. Low density assay for breed composition • Based on DGEA data • A low density assay of about 200 SNPs have been identified for determination of breed composition • If parentage verification is included, assay expands to 400 SNPs • Piloting its utilization among farmers for certification of bulls, heifer and cows.
  24. Experimenting with DGEA data • Non-Bayesian method: GBLUP & SNP-BLUP • Bayesian methods • Determine possible levels of accuracy for young bulls of different breed compositions with no data
  25. Current status : Accuracies of genomic prediction –based on DGEA data Validation Population Validation set Reference Set Accuracy >87.5% Exotic 297 716 0.41 60 – 87.5% Exotics 448 565 0.35 50 -33 % Exotics 178 835 0.32 A. Brown,* J. Ojango,† J. Gibson,‡ M. Coffey,* M. Okeyo,† and R. Mrode*†1 *† Short communication: Genomic selection in a crossbred cattle population using data from the Dairy Genetics East Africa Project
  26. Looking at other models  GBLUP with G matrix and a dominance matrix (D) :  Multi-trait approach.  Multi-trait GBLUP - proportion of exotic and indigenous genes as separate effects.  GEBV was computed for each of 9 chromosome regions for top cows with high exotic or indigenous genes.  Regions with highest contribution to GEBV of top cow were  chromosomes 14, 8, 1 and 2 for cows with high exotic genes  chromosome 3,1,10 and 5 for cows with high indigenous genes
  27. Accuracy of genomic prediction 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 >87.4 61-87.5 36-60 >36 GBLUP GBLUP + Dominance GBLUP based on breed proportion GBLUP based on breed proportion (correlated)
  28. Regression Coefficients GBLUP GBLUP + Dominance GBLUP based on breed proportion GBLUP based on breed proportion (correlated) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 >87.4 61-87.5 36-60 >36
  29.  Results from the multi-trait approach are encouraging but we need to understand it more  Idea is to find the haplotypes or chromosome segments whose origin can be traced to exotic and indigenous breeds . These can then be fitted separately  This is being explored by admixture within chromosome in collaboration with UNE
  30. Incorporating genotypes from foreign sires  Li et at 2016 examined the improvement in prediction reliabilities for 3 production traits from multi-trait SSGBLUP  Brazilian Holsteins that had no genotypes  adding information from Nordic and French Holstein bulls that had genotypes.  Interbull proofs for foreign countries used as correlated traits  Some average increases in reliabilities with foreign information included for bulls were  Milk : 2% ; Fat : 45% and none for protein
  31. Other methods explored • Currently from GBLUP or SNP-BLUP top cows tended to be dominated with cows of high degree of exotic genes. • Ideally, you want improve the milk production in cows with about medium indigenous genes • This therefore prompted using a weighted G in GBLUP. • Gwt was computed using SNP effects from BayesA and BayesB • SNPs effects were from all data, exotic (> 0.65%), indigenous (<= 0.65%) or combined exotic and indigenous (0.25:0.75)
  32. Other methods explored • Accuracy of predictions only changed for cows with <36% exotic genes • Accuracies were 0.12, 0.16 , 0.21 and 0.21 for all data, exotic, indigenous and combined respectively • Ranking of indigenous cows in the top 40% increased by 14% with using SNP effects from indigenous or combined
  33. Results cont.. Variable measure At start (2016) Now (2018) Number genotyped to inform genomic selection 0 10000 Genomically evaluated x-bred breeding bulls 0 By July 2018
  34. Delivery of improved genetics  Carvalheiro (2014) described some business models for Nellore Cattle in Brazil  One of the models: GEBVs are predicted by multinational private company and are regarded as intellectual property of the company  breeders or the breeding programs do not have access to the genotypes and genomic prediction equations but rely on company selling GEBVs
  35. Delivery of improved genetics  Developed countries  AI - companies and breed societies play major roles in  Developing countries  Farmer cooperatives  National Artificial Insemination Centers (NAIC)  AI usage is low  Bull rankings from Data Centers must be linked to NAIC or farmer cooperative  Genotyping strategy must ensure key bulls using for natural mating in villages are part of the evaluation systems  Foreign AI companies should support data collection to include daughters of their bull
  36. • Unstable internet connectivity but we are able get around it! • Weak institutions • Inadequate/not fully supportive policy to PPR-arrangements Some Challenges
  37. • The proof of concept has been quite successful and the 1st batch of genomically evaluated crossbred bulls expected by end of this year • Given data structure for smaller , well adapted methodologies will be needed for genomic selection and initial results are encouraging • In order to benefit from large numbers and diverse genetic backgrounds, regional programs is the way to go Conclusions
  38. • Need to collaborate with developed countries where some of the sires of these cows could be genotyped • Parentage discovery • Genotype by environmental interaction if enough data • Huge opportunities exist for overlaying other studies to the ADGG’s framework with potentially exciting results and outcomes Conclusions
  39. Dairy Farmers & Farmer organizations National/regional Institutions/govts. Acknowledgements The organizers of the Big Data Conference
  40. This presentation is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. better lives through livestock ilri.org ILRI thanks all donors and organizations who globally supported its work through their contributions to the CGIAR system
Advertisement