This paper studies whether cows with originally lower somatic cell count (SCC) are more susceptible to clinical mastitis (CM) than cows with higher somatic cell count, and evaluates the correlations between CM, SCC, and milk yield. Data were extracted from the Finnish national milk-recording database and from the health recording system. First and second lactation records of 87,861 Ayrshire cows calving between January 1998 and December 2000 were included. Traits studied were incidence of CM, test-day SCC, and test-day milk yield before and following CM. Genetic parameters were estimated using multitrait REML with a sire model. Results did not indicate that cows with genetically low SCC would be more susceptible to CM. The genetic correlation between CM in the first and second lactation was reasonably high (0.73), suggesting that susceptibility to mastitis remains similar across lactations. The genetic correlation between CM and milk yield traits was positive (from 0.38 to 0.56), confirming the genetic antagonism between production and udder health traits. The genetic correlation between SCC and milk was positive in the first lactation, but negative, or near zero in the second lactation. This indicates that breeding for lower SCC might not affect milk production in later lactations. The results of this study support the use of SCC as an indicator of mastitis and a tool for selection for mastitis resistance.

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of use of the test-day (TD) single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) using phenotypic records of Nordic Red Dairy cows. The critical point in ssGBLUP is how genomically derived relationships (G) are integrated with population-based pedigree relationships (A) into a combined relationship matrix (H). Therefore, we also tested how different weights for genomic and pedigree relationships affect ssGBLUP, validation reliability, and validation regression coefficients. Deregressed proofs for 305-d milk, protein, and fat yields were used for a posteriori validation. The results showed that the use of phenotypic TD records in ssGBLUP is feasible. Moreover, the TD ssGBLUP model gave considerably higher validation reliabilities and validation regression coefficients than the TD model without genomic information. No significant differences were found in validation reliability between the different TD ssGBLUP models according to bootstrap confidence intervals. However, the degree of inflation in genomic enhanced breeding values is affected by the method used in construction of the H matrix. The results showed that ssGBLUP provides a good alternative to the currently used multi-step approach but there is a great need to find the best option to combine pedigree and genomic information in the genomic matrix.

Several strategies to use genomic data in predictions have been proposed. The aim of this study was to compare different genomic prediction methods. The response variables used in the genomic predictions were deregressed proofs, which were derived from 2 estimated breeding value (EBV) data sets. The full EBV data set from March 2010 included the EBV for production and mastitis traits for all Nordic red bulls. The reduced data set included the same animals as the full data set, but the EBV were predicted from a data set that excluded the last 5 yr of observations. Genomic predictions were obtained using different BLUP models: BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP). For the selection candidate bulls, the SNP-BLUP and G-BLUP models gave the same direct genomic breeding values (e.g., correlation of direct genomic breeding values between SNP-BLUP and G-BLUP for protein was 0.99), but slightly different from genomic EBV obtained from H-BLUP (correlations of SNP-BLUP or G-BLUP with H-BLUP were about 0.96). For all traits, SNP-BLUP and G-BLUP gave the same validation reliability, whereas H-BLUP led to slightly higher reliability. Therefore, the results support a slight advantage of using H-BLUP for genomic evaluation.