Genetic Parameters and Sire Ranking for the Adjusted Estimate of Mozzarella Cheese Production in Italian Mediterranean Buffalo

E. Parlato; L. Zicarelli

doi:10.6000/1927-520X.2015.04.03.2

Authors

E. Parlato M’ama Buffalo Welfare Science and Technology, via G. Alviani, 31 Capua, ITA, Italy
L. Zicarelli Animal Production Department, Faculty of Veterinary, University of Naples Federico II, ITA, Italy

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6000/1927-520X.2015.04.03.2

Keywords:

Mozzarella cheese production, Italian buffalo, milk yield

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to investigate the effect of adjusting mozzarella cheese production (APKM) compare to the unadjusted PKM on genetic parameters and sire ranking in Italian buffalo. 337,158 lactation records at 270d, from years 1997 to 2014, up to fifth parity, of 136,525 animals were analyzed. Estimated Breeding Values (EBVs) for APKM and PKM were predicted by BLUP-Animal Model with the fixed effects of age-parity, days-open, and contemporary-group; and the random factors of animal, permanent environmental and residuals. APKM showed lower heritability (0.23) than that of PKM (0.31) which might be due to the lower genetic correlation between APKM and milk yield (MY) (0.09) compared to that of PKM with MY (0.25). APKM positively changed sire ranking with increasing rank of sire with positive EBVs of Protein and Fat percentage, and decreasing rank of sire with negative EBVs of Protein and Fat percentage. Due to the larger correlation between PKM and MY, by selecting through the PKM, one risk is to increasing the number of buffalo that produce more milk, not optimal for making mozzarella cheese. Whereas, genetic selection through the APKM will increase the number of high-yielding buffalo with positive EBVs for Protein and Fat percentage

References

Fundora O, Gonzalez ME, Lezcano O, Montejo A, Pompa N, Enriquez AV. A comparative river buffaloes and Holstein cows grazing star grass. Cuban J Agric Sci 2001; 35: 219-222.

Zicarelli L. Buffalo milk: its properties, dairy yield and mozzarella production. Vet Res Com 2004; 28: 127-135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/b:verc.0000045390.81982.4d DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VERC.0000045390.81982.4d

Ahmad S, Gaucher I., Rousseau F, Beaucher E, Piot M, Grongnet GF, Gaucheron F. Effects of acidification on physico-chemical characteristics of buffalo milk: A comparison with cow’s milk. Food Chem 2008; 106: 11-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.04.021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.04.021

Potena A, Bove D, Cocca T, Zicarelli L. Andamento di alcuni componenti del latte di bufala in funzione della distanza dal parto: risultati preliminari. I Congr. Naz. Sull’allevamento del bufalo, 3-5/10/2001, Az. Ag. Improsta Eboli 2001; 231-235.

ANASB. Associazione Nazionale allevatori specie bufalina 2014. www.anasb.it.

Altiero V, Moio L, Addeo F. Previsione della resa in mozzarella sulla base del contenuto in grasso e proteine del latte di bufala. Sci Tecn Lattiero-Casearia 1989; 40: 425-433. http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s2.381

Ariota B, Milone L, Grassi C, Zicarelli1 F, Napolano R, Giovane A, Di Palo R. Milk protein and cheese yield in buffalo species. 2009. Ital J Anim Sci 8(Suppl. 2): 381-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s2.381

Boldman KG, Kriese LA, Van Vleck LD, Van Tassell CP, Kachman SD. A manual for use of MTDFREML. A set of programs to obtain estimates of variances and covariances. Agric. Res. Serv., USDA, Washington, DC. 1995.

SAS Institute. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 9.1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute 2005.