# Presentation: 243032

## Economic Merit of Crossbred and Purebred US Dairy Cattle

## Objectives

**Document the number and type of crossbred cows in the US.**
**Estimate heterosis and breed differences using cows of different breed composition competing in the same herd.**
**Compare the economic merit of crossbred and purebred cows.**

## Traits Considered

**Milk, fat, and protein yields**
**Somatic cell score (SCS)**
**Productive life (PL)**
**Linear type composites not available**
**Body size estimates obtained from literature**
**Udder and leg trait estimates assumed zero **
**Net merit, cheese merit, fluid merit calculated**
**Adjusted to Holstein scale**
**Fertility, mortality, and calving ease not available**

## Breeds Are Evaluated Separately

**Separate data sets reduce bias in evaluations within breeds, but provide:**
**No evaluations for crossbreds**
**No method to compare cows across breeds**
**New Zealand, Australia, and the Netherlands include crossbreds and account for heterosis in evaluations.**
**USDA-DHIA evaluations exclude crossbred cows unless identified as part of a “grading-up” program.**

## Yield Traits & SCS Data

**Data were from the national test-day database available May, 2001.**
**572**** herds each with at least 5 crossbred cows**
**10,442**** crossbred cows born since 1990**
**140,421**** purebred herdmates (80% were Holstein)**
**Crossbreds defined by sire breed and maternal grandparent breeds.**
**Sires were purebred, dam breed used for unknown maternal grandparent breed**
**XX (crossbred) not accepted for maternal grandparents**
**Holstein and Red & White considered one breed**

**Notes:**
Because XB’s are not routinely evaluated, pedigree reported less often/completely 
May leads to under-count of XB’s
Started with 12,565 XB in ~3,300 herds 
Restricting data to herds with >= 5 XB cows retained more than 80% of XB’s but reduced herds by more than 80% greatly reducing computing time.

## Number of F1 & Purebred Cows In Mixed Breed Contemporary Groups

|  |  |  |  | Sire Breed |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Dam Breed |  | Ayrshire |  | Brown Swiss | Guernsey | Jersey | Milking Shorthorn | Holstein |
| Ayrshire |  | 933 |  | — | 1 | 26 | 2 | 477 |
| Brown Swiss |  | — |  | 2537 | 8 | 22 | 5 | 242 |
| Guernsey |  | 8 |  | 31 | 1763 | 23 | 4 | 1228 |
| Jersey |  | 18 |  | 22 | 11 | 6593 | 8 | 507 |
| M. Shorthorn |  | — |  | 11 | 1 | — | 1509 | 175 |
| Holstein |  | 145 |  | 819 | 130 | 1631 | 162 | 71,836 |

## Number of F1 & Backcross Cows With Holstein Sire or Grandparent

|  |  | Holstein Genes |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Second Breed |  |   25% |   50% |   75% |
| Ayrshire |  |   17 |   622 | 124 |
| Brown Swiss |  | 124 | 1061 | 196 |
| Guernsey |  |   32 | 1358 | 367 |
| Jersey |  | 171 | 2138 | 321 |
| M. Shorthorn |  |   14 |   337 |   48 |

## Results

**Estimated breed means**
**Estimates of heterosis**
**Economic comparisons**
**Rank other breeds on Holstein base**
**Some new crossbreeding theory**

## Crossbreeding Theory Holstein  Brown Swiss Protein Yield

**—****  ****Holstein mean**

**Notes:**
Recombination effect was positive in this study.
Effects shown are weighted average of reciprocal cross types; possible maternal effects are ignored. 

## Breed Differences & Heterosis for Economic Merit  

| Breed |  | Net
Merit ($) | Cheese
 Merit ($) | Fluid
 Merit ($) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ayrshire | -510 |  | -469 |  -728 |
| Brown Swiss | -355 |  | -256 |  -808 |
| Guernsey | -761 |  | -692 | -1117 |
| Jersey | -305 |  | -186 |  -865 |
| M. Shorthorn | -892 |  | -862 | -1073 |
| Holstein | — |  | — | — |
| Heterosis | $197 |  | $207 | $163 |

## Merit of F1 Holstein Crossbreds

| Second Breed |  | Net 
Merit ($) | Cheese
Merit ($) | Fluid
Merit ($) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ayrshire |  -58 |  |  -27 | -201 |
| Brown Swiss |   18 |  |   79 | -241 |
| Guernsey | -184 |  | -138 | -395 |
| Jersey |   44 |  |  113 | -269 |
| M. Shorthorn | -249 |  | -223 | -373 |

**Compared to 2000 genetic base for Holstein**

## Mates for Holstein Cows

|  | Brown Swiss |  | Jersey |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Top US Sire | Ransom |  | Fan Club |
| NM$ (breed scale) |   $519 |  |   $467 |
| Breed Difference (from HOL) | - $178 |  | - $153 |
| Heterosis (NM$) |   + $197 |  | + $197 |
| Adjusted NM$ (HOL scale) |   $538 |  |    $511 |
| NM$ Rank (HOL scale) |  28 |  |  40 |
| CM$ Rank (HOL scale) |  13 |  |  12 |

**Notes:**
Cheese Merit Calculations:
			Ransom	Fan CLub
CM$ (breed)	 533		 509
breed difference	-128		 -94
heterosis		+207		+207
adjusted CM$	$612		$622

## Conclusions

**Conclusions**

## Conclusions

**Currently**** < 0.5%**** of DHI cows are crossbred.**
**Heterosis was about ****4%**** for yield traits, ****< 1%**** (unfavorable) for SCS, and ****1%**** for PL.**
**Profit from Jersey ******** Holstein and Brown Swiss ******** Holstein crosses is higher than from Holsteins.**
**Fewer extreme bulls are found in minor breeds.**
**Backcross yields were higher than expected.**

## From 1939-1954, M.H. Fohrman studied 113 Guernsey, Jersey, Holstein, and Red Danes crosses at Beltsville.
Another study of 137 Ayrshire, Brown Swiss and Holstein crosses was conducted from 1959-1968 (McDowell and McDaniel, 1968).

**Another study of 137 Ayrshire, Brown Swiss and Holstein crosses was conducted from 1959-1968 (McDowell and McDaniel, 1968).**

***USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947***

**Holstein ******** Guernsey**

**Notes:**
Breeds were:
	HOLSTEIN
	JERSEY
	GUERNSEY (female only – no proven GUE SIRE available)
	RED DANE 
Cows milked 3x, barn fed.

## Holstein  Jersey

**Holstein ******** Jersey**

| Cow # | Pounds of Milk | % Butterfat | Pounds of Butterfat |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  X-5 | 13,032 | 4.62 | 602 |
| X-11 | 12,584 | 4.82 | 606 |
| X-20 | 12,383 | 5.13 | 636 |
| X-30 | 11,867 | 5.60 | 664 |
| X-38 | 11,929 | 5.09 | 607 |
| X-40 | 13,690 | 4.74 | 649 |
| X-51 | 13,800 | 4.44 | 613 |

**All cows sired by Beltsville Holstein No. 966 **

**Notes:**
Results From Fohrman et. al
HOLSTEIN SIRE PROOF:
	644lbs daus>dam milk (18,416 vs 17,772)
	26lbs daus>dam fat (645 vs 619) 
	#DAUS=31
AVG:	12755lbs milk (3670kg)	
	4.92% fat
	625lbs fat (150kg)

## Jersey  Holstein

**Jersey ******** Holstein**

| Cow # | Pounds of Milk | % Butterfat | Pounds of Butterfat |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  X-1 |   9,784 | 4.85 | 475 |
|  X-3 | 13,065 | 4.71 | 615 |
| X-17 | 13,837 | 3.85 | 533 |
| X-32 | 13,728 | 3.94 | 540 |
| X-41 | 12,453 | 4.63 | 576 |
| X-42 |   9,417 | 4.90 | 461 |
| X-47 | 12,189 | 5.13 | 625 |

**X-1 and X-47 were sired by an unidentified Jersey  sire.  All others sired by Beltsville Jersey No. 1114 **

**Notes:**
AVG:	13054lbs milk (5760kg) 
	4.57% fat
	546lbs protein (260kg)

## Butterfat yield of three breed crosses was greater than from their F1 crossbred dams.
Three breed crosses averaged 14,927 pounds of milk and 641 pounds of butterfat as 2-year-olds in 1947. 

**Three breed crosses averaged ****14,927**** pounds of milk and ****641**** pounds of butterfat as 2-year-olds in 1947. **

***USDA Yearbook of Agriculture 1947***

**Three-Breed Crosses**

**Notes:**
6660kg milk
290kg fat

No predictions based on f1 daus:dam so don’t know whether this can be attributed to ‘hybrid vigor’
This group was heavy on the Red Dane sire
These were 3 breed crosses, so more hybrid vigor should be maintained (~85% in 3 breed rotations), 
as opposed to rotating only 2 breeds (~65% in 2 breed rotations)