|
|
||||||||


* Dairy Science Department,
Pathobiological Sciences Department, and
Animal Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706
1 Corresponding author: geshook{at}wisc.edu
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
0.10) or positive fecal culture test were deleted from the data set. The remaining 4,603 cows from 238 herds and 46 sires were used to estimate heritability of M. paratuberculosis infection. Heritability was estimated with 3 Johnes disease diagnostic tests: 1) fecal culture alone, 2) serum antibody ELISA alone, and 3) both tests (combined) with a positive animal defined as all animals with either a positive fecal culture or ELISA test. Four statistical models were used to estimate heritability: 1) linear (ELISA), 2) threshold (fecal culture and combined), 3) ordered threshold (ELISA), and 4) bivariate linear-threshold (ELISA-fecal culture). A sire model and Bayesian approach using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods were used in each case. Heritability of infection based on the fecal culture test was 0.153 [posterior standard deviation (PSD) = 0.115]. Heritability with the ELISA was 0.159 (PSD = 0.090) with a linear model and 0.091 (PSD = 0.053) with an ordered threshold model. Heritability of the combined tests was 0.102 (PSD = 0.066). Heritability estimates of fecal culture and ELISA with the bivariate model varied slightly from estimates obtained with the univariate models (0.125 and 0.183, respectively), with a corresponding increase in precision (PSD = 0.096 and 0.082, respectively). This study demonstrates that exploitable genetic variation exists in dairy cattle for M. paratuberculosis infection susceptibility.
Key Words: Johnes disease genetic variation heritability Holstein
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Genetic variability of susceptibility to bacterial infections has been estimated for some cattle diseases. Clinical mastitis has been the most extensively studied, with heritability estimates ranging from 0.01 to 0.09 (Carlen et al., 2004; Heringstad et al., 2004; Odegard et al., 2004). Heritability estimates for metritis have also been reported (ranging from 0 to 0.26; Lin et al., 1989; Simerl et al., 1991; Zwald et al., 2004).
Two studies have estimated heritability of Johnes disease susceptibility. In the first study, based on postmortem carcass evaluations, heritability ranged from <0.01 to 0.09 in 3,020 Dutch dairy cattle, according to a threshold model (Koets et al., 2000). Although postmortem carcass evaluations are likely the most accurate method of identifying M. paratuberculosis-infected animals, this method is not practical for routine disease diagnosis. Numerous diagnostic tests for Johnes disease have been developed including serum and milk ELISA, fecal bacterial culture, skin tests, and IFN-
assays (Collins and Manning, 2005). The only diagnostic test used to estimate heritability of Johnes disease susceptibility has been the milk ELISA (Mortensen et al., 2004). In this second study of M. paratuberculosis infection susceptibility, the estimated heritability was 0.102 in 11,535 Danish Holsteins with a bivariate linear model (the other dependent variable being daily milk yield).
The heritability of Johnes disease susceptibility may vary with the diagnostic test. For example, SCS is often used as a proxy for mastitis; however, heritability estimates were larger for SCS (0.10 to 0.14) than for clinical mastitis as measured by veterinary treatments (0.01 to 0.03) with a bivariate linear model (Carlen et al., 2004; Odegard et al., 2004). The statistical model may also influence heritability estimates; heritability of clinical mastitis was larger when estimated with a threshold model (0.05 to 0.09; Heringstad et al., 2004).
The objective of this study was to estimate heritability of M. paratuberculosis infection as measured by serum ELISA and fecal culture of M. paratuberculosis in US Holsteins. Johnes disease is a good candidate for genetic selection because it is incurable and an effective vaccine is not available.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Serum and fecal samples were collected from daughters of these sires in US dairy herds by the respective herd veterinarians. Herds were selected on the following criteria: 1) participation in the US Dairy Herd Improvement program, and 2) presence of at least 5 cows in second or third lactation sired by one or more project bulls. Cows in second or third lactation are more likely to produce antibodies to M. paratuberculosis than are cows in first lactation (Jubb and Galvin, 2000). Prevalence of infection in later lactations (>3) would be biased downwards because some infected cows would already have been culled from the herd. Approximately 67% of cows in this study were in second or third lactation; the rest were primarily first-lactation cows. None of the sampled herds was vaccinated for Johnes disease. Approximately 32% of samples were obtained from herds in Wisconsin, 16% from herds in California, and the remaining samples from herds scattered throughout the United States. Data were collected from July 1999 to July 2003, although 66% of samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. Samples from the preliminary study were collected in 1999 and 2000. A total of 5,611 cows from 300 herds were sampled.
Disease Diagnosis
An antibody test on the serum samples was performed using a USDA-licensed Johnes ELISA kit (Idexx Laboratories, Inc., Westbrook, ME). The ELISA measures the amount of M. paratuberculosis antibody present in the cows serum, which is an indicator of M. paratuberculosis infection and, therefore, susceptibility to infection. Optical density values for the serum, positive control, and negative control were converted to sample-to-positive (S/P) ratios. Fecal culture of M. paratuberculosis was performed using the radiometric (Bactec) method (Collins et al., 1990). Diagnostic tests were performed by the Johnes Testing Center at the School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Infection by M. paratuberculosis was defined in 3 ways: 1) fecal culture alone, 2) ELISA alone, or 3) combined fecal culture and ELISA. Cows with M. paratuberculosis cultured from feces after incubation for 12 wk were considered fecal culture-positive. For the ELISA, transformed S/P ratios were either used directly as the phenotype or S/P ratios were placed into ordered categories as follows: 1) negative (S/P ratio 0 to 0.09), 2) suspect (0.10 to 0.24), 3) weak positive (0.25 to 0.39), 4) positive (0.40 to 0.99), and 5) strong positive (
1.00). These categories were based on recommendations by the Johnes Testing Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (Collins, 2002). For the combined test, ELISA and fecal culture were used in parallel; that is, cows with either a positive fecal culture or ELISA S/P ratio
0.25 were diagnosed as M. paratuberculosis-infected.
Data Editing
Herds without a suspect or test-positive cow were removed from the data set because there was no evidence of exposure to M. paratuberculosis in our data. Our case definition for this purpose was defined as either a positive fecal culture or ELISA S/P ratio
0.10. A lower S/P ratio was used because only a small number of cows from most herds were tested for the disease. A higher S/P ratio threshold would have removed more herds from the study, decreasing precision of our estimates further and potentially removing many cows that were exposed to M. paratuberculosis but not susceptible to the infection. After removing 62 herds without suspect or test-positive cows, half-sib families with fewer than 5 cows were removed because these families provided little information for estimating heritability. Fourth- and fifth-parity cows were grouped with third-parity cows because our data set contained very few of these animals. This edited data set consisted of records from 4,603 cows from 46 sires in 238 herds. Of these cows, 4,233 (92.0%) were daughters of the 12 project sires. All 12 project half-sib families remained in the edited data set. Numbers of cows in lactations 1, 2, and 3 were 1,525 (33.13%), 2,239 (48.64%), and 839 (18.23%), respectively. Apparent M. paratuberculosis infection prevalences in the edited and complete datasets were similar (Table 1
). One-third of fecal culture-positive cows were ELISA-negative (S/P <0.10; Table 2
). About 23.3 and 5% of fecal culture-negative cows were ELISA-positive (S/P
0.10 and
0.25, respectively). This data set was used to estimate heritability with the ELISA and combined test. Fecal cultures were either not performed or the culture was contaminated with microbes other than M. paratuberculosis for 909 cows. Therefore, 3,694 cows from 45 sires in 226 herds were used to estimate heritability with the fecal culture.
|
|
Linear Model.
A mixed linear model was used to analyze log transformed ELISA S/P ratios as follows:
![]() |
where ELISAT = transformed ELISA S/P ratio. The S/P ratios were transformed to attain a more nearly normal frequency distribution. The fitted model was
![]() |
where yijkl = transformed ELISA S/P ratio, pi = fixed effect of parity, sj = random sire effect, hk = random herd effect, and eijkl = residual. Random effects for the univariate models were assumed to be normally distributed as follows:
![]() |
where h = herd effect, s = sire effect, I = identity matrix,
h2 = herd variance, A = sire additive numerator relationship matrix, and
s2 = sire variance. Residuals were assumed to be normally distributed with mean zero and variance
e2, where
e2 = residual variance. Parameters were estimated using original Linear.F90 software developed by Y. M. Chang (provided upon request).
Threshold Model.
A mixed threshold model was used to estimate parameters with the fecal culture and combined tests. This model assumes an underlying normally distributed disease liability. Cows with liability to disease greater than the threshold (zero) were infected, and cows with liability to disease less than the threshold were noninfected. A cumulative normal density function was used to link disease liability with probability of infection (either 0 or 1). The threshold model was
![]() |
where lijkl = liability for cow ijkl, and other terms were defined previously. The threshold was set to zero and residual variance was set to 1.00.
For the combined test, sire families were evaluated based on their predicted probability of M. paratuberculosis-infected daughters. Probabilities were estimated from the posterior mean of the sire PTA for liability as follows (Chang et al., 2004):
![]() |
where yij = binary response variable with value 0 if cow is noninfected and 1 if infected, µ = population mean liability, &smacr;i = posterior mean PTA of liability for sire i, and
(.) = cumulative normal density function. The sire liabilities were transformed into probabilities of future M. paratuberculosis-infected daughters relative to the overall population mean. A 95% confidence interval for this probability was calculated for each sire as
(&smacr;i ± 1.96 posterior standard deviation, PSD). Sire PTA probabilities are a nonlinear transformation of sire PTA liabilities. As a result, sires were ranked in the same order on both scales but the probability is more easily interpretable. Parameters and probabilities were estimated using Probit.F90 software developed by Y. M. Chang (Chang et al., 2004; available upon request).
Ordered Threshold Model.
Cows were placed into ordered categories based on their ELISA S/P ratios, as described previously. The ordered threshold model estimated underlying normally distributed liability of M. paratuberculosis infection. The same independent variables were used as in the linear model:
![]() |
where
ijkl = liability of M. paratuberculosis infection. Four thresholds were estimated with this model, with the first threshold, corresponding to an S/P ratio of 0.10, set to zero. For example, if a cow is in category c, its liability of M. paratuberculosis infection falls between thresholds Tc1 and Tc. Parameters were estimated using original Ordinal.F90 software developed by Y. M. Chang (available upon request).
Bivariate Threshold-Linear Model.
A bivariate model with fecal culture and ELISA results was used to estimate heritability of M. paratuberculosis infection as follows:
![]() |
where Y1 = transformed ELISA S/P ratios as described for the linear model, Y2 = liability for fecal culture test, X = incidence matrix relating fixed effect of parity ß to observations, Zh = incidence matrix relating random herd effects h to observations, Zs = incidence matrix relating random sire effects s to observations, and Ze = incidence matrix relating residuals e to observations. Herd and sire effects were assumed normally distributed as follows:
![]() |
where hi = herd effect for the ELISA or fecal culture phenotypes, si = sire effect for the ELISA or fecal culture phenotypes, H = herd variance-covariance matrix, G = sire variance-covariance matrix, R = residual variance-covariance matrix, I = identity matrix, and A = sire additive numerator relationship matrix.
As for the threshold model, a cumulative normal density function was used to link fecal culture liability with probability of M. paratuberculosis infection (either 0 or 1). The bivariate model also estimates the genetic, herd, and residual correlations between these traits. Parameters were estimated using original Binary_Linear.F90 software developed by Y. M. Chang (available upon request).
Heritability Estimation.
Within-herd heritabilities were calculated for each Monte Carlo Markov chain iteration:
![]() |
where
s2 and
e2 are the sire and residual variances, respectively. Posterior means and standard deviations are reported.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
3. Previous studies have shown an increase in probability of detecting M. paratuberculosis infection among older cows (Jakobsen et al., 2000; Nielsen et al., 2002). Our estimate for third-parity cows was perhaps slightly inflated because this parity also included fourth- and fifth-parity cows; however, cows with parity >3 represented only about 5% of third-parity cows (less than 1% of all cows). Removing fourth-and fifth-parity cows from the data set did not change our heritability estimates.
Heritability estimates were similar between diagnostic tests (Table 4
). For each model, the frequency distribution of posterior sire variance estimates was skewed to the left; however, using the median did not significantly change the heritability estimate. Estimated heritability of liability to M. paratuberculosis infection with the fecal culture and combined tests was 0.153 and 0.102, respectively, with a threshold model. Although a slightly larger heritability was obtained with the fecal culture test, the PSD values were both rather large (Table 4
).
|
Heritability of the ELISA and fecal culture was estimated using a bivariate model, which accounted for the correlation between these tests. For the ELISA, the log-transformed S/P ratios were used. With the bivariate model, the ELISA estimate of heritability was 0.183 and the fecal culture estimate was 0.125. The ELISA and fecal culture estimates were slightly larger and smaller, respectively, than their univariate estimates. The PSD were also smaller with the bivariate model relative to their PSD in the univariate models, indicating a small increase in precision. The estimated genetic correlation between ELISA and fecal culture was 0.211 (PSD = 0.356). Given the large coefficient of variation (1.687), no conclusions can be drawn from this estimate. Estimated herd and residual correlations were 0.238 (PSD = 0.144) and 0.491 (PSD = 0.029), respectively.
The coefficient of variation of the estimates was larger for the combined test than the ELISA, indicating that the heritability estimate for the ELISA was more precise. However, the combined test also used information from both diagnostic tests (fecal culture and ELISA) for disease diagnosis. As a result, the combined test has a higher diagnostic sensitivity than either test alone (sensitivity is the frequency of observing a positive test result when the cow is M. paratuberculosis-infected; Collins and Sockett, 1993). Therefore, estimated heritability for infection based on the combined test (0.102) may be closest to true heritability of M. paratuberculosis infection.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
0.25 are taken to indicate M. paratuberculosis infection (Collins and Sockett, 1993). Testing cows multiple times during their lactations would have increased sensitivity. In comparison, Mortensen et al., (2004) tested cows 1 to 3 times for infection, but used only one diagnostic test (milk ELISA). An ELISA S/P ratio cut-off of 0.25 was used to classify cows as M. paratuberculosis-infected with the combined test. A larger S/P ratio cut-off would have decreased the number of false-positives, but increased the number of false-negative results. For purposes of genetic analysis, using a diagnostic test that more precisely discriminates between positive and negative animals is more important than setting a high threshold to avoid the cost of a false-positive result to producers. By using a lower cut-off value, the number of false-positives would be increased, but the number of false-negatives would be decreased. The false-negative rates of fecal culture and ELISA are higher than the false-positive rates, so false-negatives were more of a concern in this study. Heritability of the combined test was estimated with ELISA cut-offs of 0.10 and 0.40, and these estimates were similar to our reported estimate (data not shown).
A previous study estimated sires relative risk of having M. paratuberculosis-infected daughters (Koets et al., 2000). In that study, relative risk for the highest 2.5% of sires (among 1,761) was 1.16 times the risk for the lowest 2.5% of sires. Based on the mean (µ) and standard deviation (SD) of all 46 sire PTA probabilities in the present study and assuming a normal distribution, the 95% confidence interval for the probabilities was calculated as (±1.96 SD) + µ. In the present study, predicted probability of M. paratuberculosis-infected daughters for the highest 2.5% of sires (among 46) was 1.73 times the risk for the lowest 2.5% of sires. The difference between outcomes might be due to the number of daughters per bull. Koets et al. (2000) had 3,020 cows sired by 1,761 bulls; <2 daughters per bull on average. Their sire evaluations would be very strongly regressed to the population average due to the small number of daughters per sire. In contrast, our study had an average of 100 daughters per sire, so the regression of breeding value on phenotype was on average much larger.
Our heritability of the combined test is the most similar to estimates obtained in previous studies of M. paratuberculosis infection. Heritability of M. paratuberculosis infection measured with a milk ELISA was 0.102 in a previous study with Danish Holsteins (Mortensen et al., 2004). In their study, heritability was estimated with a bivariate linear model with dependent variables milk ELISA and test-day milk yield. This estimate is comparable with our estimate with the combined test (also 0.102). Heritability of M. paratuberculosis infection measured by postmortem carcass evaluations was 0.06 with vaccinated and nonvaccinated animals (n = 3,020) but less than 0.01 for nonvaccinated cows alone (n = 760; Koets et al., 2000). The nonvaccinated subset likely did not have enough data for an accurate heritability estimate (the standard error was not reported for the nonvaccinated subset). Therefore, the estimate including vaccinated and nonvaccinated animals is likely the most reliable. Our heritability estimate with the combined test (0.102), using only nonvaccinated cows, was similar to this more reliable estimate (0.06) by Koets et al., (2000).
Transmission of M. paratuberculosis infection through semen is plausible given the extensive distribution of M. paratuberculosis in accessory sex glands of breeding bulls (Ayele et al., 2004). Sexual transmission of the infection could also cause differences between prevalences of M. paratuberculosis infections in our half-sib families and bias our heritability estimates. The 12 bulls with the largest number of daughters were tested routinely for Johnes disease and did not test positive for M. paratuberculosis infection (personal communication from bull owners). However, sensitivity of diagnostic tests for Johnes disease is low. Therefore, a small possibility exists that bulls that tested negative for M. paratuberculosis infection were false-negatives and M. paratuberculosis-infected.
Our heritability estimates were similar regardless of the diagnostic test used to define a cow as infected. This result is not surprising because each test measures M. paratuberculosis infection (Gardner et al., 2000). Nevertheless, ELISA and fecal culture could be measuring genetically different responses to infection. Some M. paratuberculosis-infected cows shed the bacteria in feces but do not produce serum antibodies to M. paratuberculosis and vice versa. Some genes that affect serum antibody production to M. paratuberculosis differ from genes that affect M. paratuberculosis shedding in feces. The small difference between fecal culture and ELISA heritability estimates could be caused by the lack of complete pleiotropy between genes affecting each test result. However, differences in heritability between diagnostic tests could also be the result of sampling variation and the different statistical models used to estimate variance components. Practically, veterinarians would diagnose disease status using the combined test when both the fecal culture and ELISA are available. Often, only one test is available, so heritability for each test alone was estimated.
The ordered threshold model estimated a smaller heritability with the ELISA than did the linear model. The ELISA S/P ratios were transformed to approximate normality for the linear model. Nevertheless, the transformation did not achieve complete normality. The ordered threshold does not require a normally distributed phenotype. Although some information is lost because ELISA S/P ratios are grouped into categories, we believe the ordered threshold model is most appropriate for estimating heritability of the ELISA.
Heritability estimates for fecal culture and ELISA with the bivariate model differed slightly from estimates with the univariate models. Despite both tests measuring M. paratuberculosis infection status, a negative genetic correlation (0.211) between these tests was found. However, precision of the genetic correlation estimate in this study was very low (PSD = 0.356; CV = 1.687), for reasons similar to the lack of precision of our heritability estimates. Conclusions cannot be drawn from our genetic correlation estimate because of its low precision.
Infection with M. paratuberculosis is determined by host and bacterial genetic and environmental factors. One important environmental factor is the degree of exposure to M. paratuberculosis. Cows with higher levels of M. paratuberculosis exposure are more likely to become infected with the organism. An additional source of variation may be an interaction between host genetics and exposure level. For example, certain genes may only affect M. paratuberculosis infection when exposure to the organism is high. Unfortunately, cows were not uniformly exposed to M. paratuberculosis and exposure cannot reliably be measured under field conditions. Herds without cows having either a positive fecal culture or ELISA S/P ratio
0.10 were not included in this study. This criterion should have removed from the data set cows that were not exposed to M. paratuberculosis and thereby increased the likelihood of at least some level of exposure for all cows in this study.
| CONCLUSIONS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Received for publication June 23, 2005. Accepted for publication December 12, 2005.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Hinger, H. Brandt, and G. Erhardt Heritability Estimates for Antibody Response to Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis in German Holstein Cattle J Dairy Sci, August 1, 2008; 91(8): 3237 - 3244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Osterstock, G. T. Fosgate, N. D. Cohen, J. N. Derr, and A. J. Roussel Familial and herd-level associations with paratuberculosis enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay status in beef cattle J Anim Sci, August 1, 2008; 86(8): 1977 - 1983. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. Wang, C. Maltecca, R. Tal-Stein, E. Lipkin, and H. Khatib Association of Bovine Fibroblast Growth Factor 2 (FGF2) Gene with Milk Fat and Productive Life: An Example of the Ability of the Candidate Pathway Strategy to Identify Quantitative Trait Genes J Dairy Sci, June 1, 2008; 91(6): 2475 - 2480. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Khatib, R. L. Monson, V. Schutzkus, D. M. Kohl, G. J. M. Rosa, and J. J. Rutledge Mutations in the STAT5A Gene Are Associated with Embryonic Survival and Milk Composition in Cattle J Dairy Sci, February 1, 2008; 91(2): 784 - 793. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Khatib, I. Zaitoun, J. Wiebelhaus-Finger, Y. M. Chang, and G. J. M. Rosa The Association of Bovine PPARGC1A and OPN Genes with Milk Composition in Two Independent Holstein Cattle Populations J Dairy Sci, June 1, 2007; 90(6): 2966 - 2970. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Hinger, H. Brandt, S. Horner, and G. Erhardt Short Communication: Association Analysis of Microsatellites and Mycobacterium avium Subspecies paratuberculosis Antibody Response in German Holsteins J Dairy Sci, April 1, 2007; 90(4): 1957 - 1961. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |