Table 4. National evaluation data consider ed in the Interbull routine evaluation
for dairy production traits (August 2003). Evaluation model summary
 
h2
Country Breed(s)

milk

fat

prot

model

Australia AYS GUE HOL JER .25 .25 .25 ST R AM
Belgium # HOL .38 .43 .41 MT ML RR TD AM
Canada AYS .36 .31 .32 MT ML RR TD AM
BSW .41 .36 .38 - " -
GUE .42 .36 .39 - " -
HOL .38 .35 .36 - " -
JER .42 .35 .39 - " -
Czech Republic HOL SIM .33 .35 .32 ST R AM
Denmark AYS HOL RHOL JER .30 .30 .30 ST R AM
Estonia HOL .27 .23 .24 ST ML FR TD AM
Finland AYS HOL .44 .33 .33 MT ML RR TD AM
France BSW HOL RHOL SIM MON .30 .30 .30 ST R AM
Germany-Austria AYS HOL JER .49 .48 .48 ST ML RR TD AM
BSW .46 .41 .39 ST ML RR TD AM
SIM .43 .38 .34 - " -
Hungary HOL SIM .25 .20 .20 ST R AM
Ireland HOL .35 .35 .35 ST R AM
Israel HOL .43 .52 .41 ST ML AM
Italy BSW .31 .23 .29 ST R AM
HOL .30 .30 .30 ST R AM
JER .30 .30 .30 ST R AM
SIM .33 .31 .29 ST AM
Japan HOL .33 .31 .29 ST R AM
Netherlands ## BSW HOL JER SIM .59 .58 .52 ST ML RR TD AM
New Zealand AYS BSW GUE HOL JER .35 .28 .31 ST R AM
Norway AYS .25 .25 .25 ST SM
Poland HOL .26 .23 .20 ST ML AM
Rep. South Africa AYS .27 .23 .25 MT SL AM
GUE .29 .19 .22 - " -
HOL .35 .31 .33 - " -
JER .30 .27 .30 - " -
Slovenia BSW .33 .27 .28 ST R AM
HOL .30 .26 .25 - " -
SIM .37 .30 .31 - " -
Spain HOL .28 .28 .28 ST R AM
Sweden AYS HOL .33 .33 .33 ST R AM
Switzerland BSW RHOL SIM .36 .34 .34 ST ML FR TD AM
HOL .36 .30 .30 ST ML FR TD AM
United Kingdom AYS GUE HOL JER .35 .35 .35 ST R AM
United States AYS GUE HOL .30 .30 .30 ST R AM
BSW JER .35 .35 .35 - " -

# Walloon part of Belgium
## The Netherlands + Flemish part of Belgium
RHOL = Red Holstein; MON = Montbeliarde
AM=Animal Model; SM=Sire/Maternal Grandsire Model
ST ML=Model with lactations as correlated traits;
MT=Multiple-traits; MT SL=Multiple-trait model with single lactation;
TD=Test Day Model; FR=Fixed regression; RR=Random regression