Evidence Hub

A systematic review with meta‐analysis of heritability estimates for temperament‐related traits in beef and dairy cattle populations

L. Pinto, B. D. Medrado, V. Pedrosa, L. Brito

Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie, 2024

15 citations

Abstract

Abstract Temperament (docility) is a key breeding goal in the cattle industry due to its direct relationship with animal welfare, cattle handler's safety and animal productivity. Over the past six decades, numerous studies have reported heritability estimates for temperament‐related traits in cattle populations ranging from low to high values. Therefore, the primary objective of this study was to perform a comprehensive systematic review with meta‐analysis to obtain weighted estimates of heritability for temperament‐related traits in worldwide cattle populations. After data editing and quality control, 106 studies were included in the systematic review, of which 29.2% and 70.8% reported estimates of heritability for temperament‐related traits in dairy and beef cattle populations, respectively. Meta‐analyses were performed for 95 heritability estimates using a random model approach. The weighted heritability estimates were as follow: (a) flight score at weaning = 0.23 (95% CI: 0.15–0.32); (b) flight speed at weaning = 0.30 (95% CI: 0.26–0.33); (c) joint analysis of flight speed and flight score at weaning = 0.27 (95% CI: 0.22–0.31); (d) flight speed at yearling = 0.26 (95% CI: 0.21–0.30); (e) joint analysis of flight speed at weaning and yearling = 0.27 (95% CI: 0.24–0.30); (f) movement score = 0.12 (95% CI: 0.08–0.15); (g) crush score at weaning = 0.21 (95% CI: 0.17–0.25); (h) pen score at weaning = 0.27 (95% CI: 0.19–0.34); (i) pen score at yearling = 0.20 (95% CI:…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free