Primary genome scan to identify putative quantitative trait loci for feedlot growth rate, feed intake, and feed efficiency of beef cattle.

ABSTRACT

Feed intake and feed efficiency of beef cattle are economically relevant traits. The study was conducted to identify QTL for feed intake and feed efficiency of beef cattle by using genotype information from 100 microsatellite markers and 355 SNP genotyped across 400 progeny of 20 Angus, Charolais, or Alberta Hybrid bulls. Traits analyzed include feedlot ADG, daily DMI, feed-to-gain ratio [FG, which is the reciprocal of the efficiency of gain (GF)], and residual feed intake (RFI). A mixed model with sire as random and QTL effects as fixed was used to generate an F-statistic profile across and within families for each trait along each chromosome, followed by empirical permutation tests to determine significance thresholds for QTL detection. Putative QTL for ADG (chromosome-wise P < 0.05) were detected across families on chromosomes 5 (130 cM), 6 (42 cM), 7 (84 cM), 11 (20 cM), 14 (74 cM), 16 (22 cM), 17 (9 cM), 18 (46 cM), 19 (53 cM), and 28 (23 cM). For DMI, putative QTL that exceeded the chromosome-wise P < 0.05 threshold were detected on chromosomes 1 (93 cM), 3 (123 cM), 15 (31 cM), 17 (81 cM), 18 (49 cM), 20 (56 cM), and 26 (69 cM) in the across-family analyses. Putative across-family QTL influencing FG that exceeded the chromosome-wise P < 0.05 threshold were detected on chromosomes 3 (62 cM), 5 (129 cM), 7 (27 cM), 11 (16 cM), 16 (30 cM), 17 (81 cM), 22 (72 cM), 24 (55 cM), and 28 (24 cM). Putative QTL influencing RFI that exceeded the chromosome-wise P < 0.05 threshold were detected on chromosomes 1 (90 cM), 5 (129 cM), 7 (22 cM), 8 (80 cM), 12 (89 cM), 16 (41 cM), 17 (19 cM), and 26 (48 cM) in the across-family analyses. In addition, a total of 4, 6, 1, and 8 chromosomes showed suggestive evidence (chromosome-wise, P < 0.10) for putative ADG, DMI, FG, and RFI QTL, respectively. Most of the QTL detected across families were also detected within families, although the locations across families were not necessarily the locations within families, which is likely because of differences among families in marker informativeness for the different linkage groups. The locations and direction of some of the QTL effects reported in this study suggest potentially favorable pleiotropic effects for the underlying genes. Further studies will be required to confirm these QTL in other populations so that they can be fine-mapped for potential applications in marker-assisted selection and management of beef cattle.