For BBB, estimates of direct and maternal heritabilities (±SE) were 0.45 (☐.07) and 0.08 (☐.01) by using Model MBV, and 0.45 (☐.08) and 0.09 (☐.02) for Model MBSM, respectively. Genetic parameters differed between single-breed and multi-breed analysis, but are similar to the literature. The main difference between these models is the way in which relationships between breeds are accounted for in the genetic (co)variance structure. Both multi-breed models use different functions of breed proportions as random regressions, thereby enabling modelling different additive effects according to animal's breed composition. Variance components and derived genetic parameters for purebred BBB and HOL and crossbred BBB × HOL cattle were then estimated by using two multi-breed linear animal models: a multi-breed model based on a random regression test-day model (Model MBV), and a multi-breed model based on the random regression multi-breed model (Model MBSM). Moreover, a significant negative genetic correlation between direct and maternal effects was obtained in both breeds: −0.46 (☐.04) for BBB and −0.29 (☐.11) for HOL. Estimates of direct and maternal heritabilities (±standard error) were 0.34 (☐.02) and 0.09 (☐.01) for BBB, respectively, but only 0.09 (☐.01) and 0.04 (☐.01) for HOL, respectively. This analysis showed clear genetic differences between breeds. Variance components and derived genetic parameters for purebred BBB and HOL animals were estimated by using single-breed linear animal models. The objective of this study was to verify the feasibility of a joint genetic evaluation system for calving ease trait of Belgian Blue (BBB) and Holstein (HOL) Walloon cattle based on data of purebred and crossbred animals. This article surveys the existing literature on the phenomena, in general, and identifies several methodological and data-ralated issues germane to the study and understanding of the activities of this set of external policy advisory system actors. However, current understanding of the origins and significance of the use of policy consultants in modern government is poor with some seeing this development as part of a shift in the overall nature of state-societal relations to the ‘service’ or ‘franchise’ state and away from the ‘positive’ or ‘regulatory’ state, while others see it as a less significant activity linked to the normal development of policy advice systems in modern government.
Concern has arisen over the costs incurred by governments in this area and over the possible rise of a ‘consultocracy’ with the corresponding diminishment of democratic practices and public direction of policy and administrative development that could entail. The use of external policy consultants in government has been an increasing focus of concern among governments in the U.S., the UK, Canada and Australia, among others.
0 kommentar(er)
