Status as of: 2021-03-01 
Form GENO
DESCRIPTION OF NATIONAL GENOMIC EVALUATION SYSTEMS
Country (or countries) 	DEA 	
Main trait groupa. 
NOTE. Only one trait group per form! 	Production	
Breed(s) 	Simmental	
Trait definition(s) and unit(s) of measurement
Attach an appendix if needed 	Milk, fat and protein yields in kg.	
Source of genotypes (chips used) 	Illumina Infinium XT – DAC custom chip (see GenoEx: DAC-BS50, 43’376).	
Imputation method for missing genotypes 	findhap.f90, version 2 (VanRaden, 2011) is used to impute non-called genotypes (no imputation from lower density).	
Propagation of genomic information to non-genotyped descendants and ancestors 	Yes; current implementation is using single-step methodology	
Animals included in reference population (males, females, countries included, total number) 	Single-step methodology; all genotyped animals with national phenotypes are reference (narrow sense); currently (Dec 2020) ~ 78’000 cows and ~ 20’000 bulls 	
Source of phenotypic data (DYD, de-regressed proofs, national EBVs and/or MACE evaluations) 	Yield-deviations for cows derived from the conventional national RR-TD model	
Other criteria (data edits) for inclusion of records 	no	
Criteria for extension of records (if applicable) 	no	
Sire categories 		
Genomic model (linear, Bayesian, polygenic effect, genotypes or haplotypes) 	Standard Single-Step (BLUP) genomic model based on weighted yield-deviations, APY methodology (core ~ 28’490), 25% residual polygenic.	
Blending of direct genomic value (DGV) with traditional EBV 	Single-step methodology	
Environmental effects in the genetic evaluation model 	No (model based on preadjusted YD derived from conventional TDM)	
Adjustment for heterogeneous variance in evaluation model 	No (model based on preadjusted YD derived from conventional TDM)	
Computation of genomic reliability 	Approach described by Liu et al. (2017, 2018) and Erbe et al. (2018) assuming 25% residual polygenic.	
Blending of foreign/Interbull information in evaluation 	no	
Genetic parameters in the evaluation 	See Appendix GENO 	
Expression of genetic evaluations
If standardized (e.g. RBV), give standardization formula in the appendix 	kg	
Definition of genetic reference base 	Same as in the national conventional evaluation.	
Labeling of genomic evaluations 	Lowercase ‘g’ for ‘genomic’ for animals with valid genotype.	
Criteria for official publication of evaluations 	a) registered AI-bull, b) valid genotype, c) confirmed ancestry	
Number of evaluations / publications per year 	Three major recalibration-runs a year; genomic evaluations for candidates conducted every month.	
Use in total merit index 	Yes. Same index as used in the national conventional genetic evaluation.	
Anticipated changes in the near future 		
Key reference on methodology applied 	Aguilar, I. et al. (2010): Hot topic: A unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score. J. Dairy Sci. 93:743-752.

Misztal, I. (2015): Efficient Inversion of Genomic Relationship Matrix by the Algorithm for Proven and Young (APY). Interbull Bulletin 49:111-116.

Erbe, M. et al. (2018): Approximation of Reliability in Single Step Models using the Interbull Standardized Genomic Reliability Method. Interbull Bulletin 54:1-8.
	
Key organization: name, address, phone, fax, e-mail, web site 	Bavarian State Research Center for Agriculture, Institute for
Animal Breeding, Prof.-Dürrwaechter-Platz 1, 85586 Poing-Grub, Germany.
Phone: ++49(0)8161 8640-7144
Mail: Christian.Edel@LfL.bayern.de, 
Eduardo.Pimentel@LfL.bayern.de, Reiner.Emmerling@LfL.bayern.de
Web: http://www.lfl.bayern.de/	
aEither: Production (e.g. milk, fat, protein), Conformation, Health (e.g. mastitis resistance, milk somatic cell, resistance to diseases other than mastitis), Longevity, Calving (e.g. stillbirth, calving ease), Female fertility (e.g. non-return rate, interval between reproductive events, number of AI’s, heat strength), Workability (e.g. milking speed, temperament), Beef production, Efficiency (e.g. body weight, energy balance, body conditioning score), or Other traits. 

System Validation
Approximate number of test bulls for this trait group:	2’100	
If including foreign reference bulls:
4-yr old de-regressed MACE EBVs, OR
Current de-regressed MACE EBVs
If including foreign test bulls (type of proof 21 or 22), provide the reason.		
If using a truncation ≠ 4 years, provide the reason.		
If applying an age cutoff for test bulls ≠ (YYYY-8), provide the reason	Age cutoff 9 is used; reason: relevant amount of candidate bulls with byear 2011	

Appendix GENO
Parameters used in genetic/genomic evaluation 
Country (or countries): 	DEA	
Main trait group: 	Production	
Breed (repeat as necessary): 	Simmental (SIM)	
Trait 	Definition 	ITBa 	h2b 	Genetic varianceb 	Official proof standardisation formulac 	
mil	Milk yíeld (kg)		0.4403	312927		
fat	Fat yield (kg)		0.3969	478		
pro	Protein yield (kg)		0.3495	269		
aIndicate, with X, traits that are submitted to Interbull for international genetic evaluations.
bIf repeated records are treated as separate traits, provide heritability estimates and genetic variances separately for each trait, as well as for all traits pooled, i.e. for the trait submitted to Interbull.
cExpressed as follows: StandEval=((eval-a)/b)*c+d where a=mean of the base adjustment, b=standard deviation of the base, c=standard deviation of expression (include sign if scale is reversed), and d=base of expression.