Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems

Muhammad Younus

doi:10.55549/zbs.1882331

Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems

Abstract

Background: Livestock production is indispensable for global food security, yet it faces constant pressure to maintain a sustainable balance between environmental, economic, and ethical demands. Objective: This study explores the past, present, and future of the livestock industry through genomic technologies. Methods/Approach: Tools such as Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS), Whole-Genome Sequencing (WGS), Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS), and Genomic Selection (GS) have accelerated precise genetic improvement of traits like feed efficiency, productivity, and disease resistance. Key Tools: CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing further fosters livestock with improved genetic potential. Impact: Genomic-based breeding strategies reduce environmental impacts through lower methane-emitting ruminants and rumen microbiome utilization, while enhancing animal welfare via selection for stress resilience and innate disease resistance, reducing veterinary intervention. Conclusion: Overall, genomic approaches provide a powerful pathway for healthier, more productive, and sustainable livestock, supporting global food security amid climate and resource challenges.

Keywords

Genomic Selection, Sustainability in Livestock, CRISPR-Cas9, Reducing Methane Emissions, Disease Resistance, Animal Welfare, Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS), Climate Resilience, Feed Efficiency, Bioinformatics

Ethical Statement

Authors have declared that no competing interests exist

References

Anzalone, A. V., Randolph, P. B., Davis, J. R., Sousa, A. A., Koblan, L. W., Levy, J. M., Chen, P. J., Wilson, C., Newby, G. A., Raguram, A., & Liu, D. R. (2019). Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand breaks or donor DNA. Nature, 576(7785), 149–157.
Bao, H., Li, X., Wang, Y., Zhang, Z., & Zhao, F. (2023). Immunometabolic trade-offs in disease-resistant pigs. Animal Genetics, 54(2), 145–157.
Basarab, J. A., Beauchemin, K. A., Baron, V. S., Ominski, K. H., Guan, L. L., Miller, S. P., & Crowley, J. J. (2013). Reducing GHG emissions through genetic improvement for feed efficiency: Effects of breeding strategy and system on net emissions. Journal of Animal Science, 91(4), 1590–1608.
Benavides, M. V., Brito, L. F., Banchero, G., & La Manna, A. (2021). MHC diversity and parasite resistance in sheep. Genetics Selection Evolution, 53(1), 12.
Bhatta, M., Seetharam, A., & Whetten, R. (2020). CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in livestock: Progress and implications. Journal of Animal Science, 98(8), skaa218.
Bickhart, D. M., Rosen, B. D., Koren, S., Sayre, B. L., Hastie, A. R., Chan, S., Lee, J., Lam, E. T., Liachko, I., Sullivan, S. T., Burton, J. N., Huson, H. J., Nystrom, J. C., Kelley, C. M., Hutchison, J. L., Zhou, Y., Sun, J., Crisà, A., Ponce de León, F. A., … Smith, T. P. L. (2017). Single-molecule sequencing and chromatin conformation capture enable de novo reference assembly of the domestic goat genome. Nature Genetics, 49(4), 643–650.
Brito, L. F., Oliveira, H. R., McEwan, J. C., Miller, S., Pickering, N. K., & Schenkel, F. S. (2021). Challenges and strategies for genomic data integration in livestock. Frontiers in Genetics, 12, 742203.
Brunberg, E. I., Jensen, P., & Keeling, L. J. (2021). Serotonin genes and feather pecking in laying hens. Poultry Science, 100(3), 100912.
Burkard, C., Lillico, S. G., Reid, E., Jackson, B., Mileham, A. J., Ait-Ali, T., Whitelaw, C. B. A., & Archibald, A. L. (2017). Precision engineering for PRRSV resistance in pigs: Macrophage-specific expression of CD163 SRCR5 confers resistance to both PRRSV genotypes. PLOS Pathogens, 13(2), e1006206.
Burkard, C., Lillico, S. G., Witte, C. F., & Whitelaw, C. B. A. (2022). CD163-edited pigs resist PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(12), e2109364119.

Byrne, T. J., Santos, B. F. S., & Amer, P. R. (2023). Sustainable breeding objectives in the genomic era. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 140(1), 1–18.
De Haas, Y., Veerkamp, R. F., de Jong, G., & Aldridge, M. N. (2021). Selective breeding as a mitigation tool for methane emissions from dairy cattle. Animal, 15(1), 100294.
Difford, G. F., Plichta, D. R., Løvendahl, P., Lassen, J., Noel, S. J., Højberg, O., Wright, A.-D. G., Zhu, Z., Kristensen, L., Nielsen, H. B., Guldbrandtsen, B., & Sahana, G. (2018). Host genetics and the rumen microbiome jointly associate with methane emissions in dairy cows. PLOS Genetics, 14(10), e1007580.
Dikmen, S., Khan, F. A., Huson, H. J., Sonstegard, T. S., Moss, J. I., Dahl, G. E., & Hansen, P. J. (2014). The SLICK hair locus confers thermotolerance to intensively managed lactating Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 97(9), 5508–5520.
Elsik, C. G., Tellam, R. L., Worley, K. C., Gibbs, R. A., Muzny, D. M., Weinstock, G. M., Adelson, D. L., Eichler, E. E., Elnitski, L., Guigó, R., Hamernik, D. L., Kappes, S. M., Lewin, H. A., Lynn, D. J., Nicholas, F. W., Reymond, A., Rijnkels, M., Skow, L. C., Zdobnov, E. M., … Bovine Genome Sequencing and Analysis Consortium. (2009). The genome sequence of taurine cattle: A window to ruminant biology and evolution. Science, 324(5926), 522–528.
FAO. (2022). The state of food and agriculture 2022: Leveraging automation in agriculture for transforming agrifood systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Fraser, D. (2008). Understanding animal welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 50 (Suppl 1), S1.
Garnett, T., Godde, C., Muller, A., Röös, E., Smith, P., de Boer, I. J. M., & van Zanten, H. (2017). Grazed and confused? Ruminating on cattle, grazing systems, methane, nitrous oxide, the soil carbon sequestration question—and what it all means for greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental Research Letters, 12(11), 113001.
Gerber, P. J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A., & Tempio, G. (2013). Tackling climate change through livestock: A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Goddard, M. E., & Hayes, B. J. (2022). Genomic selection for disease resistance in livestock. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences, 10, 221–243.
Gorjanc, G., Hickey, J. M., & Ros-Freixedes, R. (2023). Optimal contribution selection for sustainable breeding. Genetics Selection Evolution, 55(1), 12.
Hayes, B. J., & Daetwyler, H. D. (2019). 1000 Bull Genomes Project to map simple and complex genetic traits in cattle: Applications and outcomes. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences, 7, 89–102.
Hayes, B. J., Donoghue, K. A., Reich, C. M., Mason, B. A., Bird-Gardiner, T., & Herd, R. M. (2016). Genomic herding: Methane reduction and beyond. Animal Production Science, 56(3), 237–243.
Hayes, B. J., Lewin, H. A., & Goddard, M. E. (2013). The future of livestock breeding: Genomic selection for efficiency, reduced emissions intensity, and adaptation. Trends in Genetics, 29(4), 206–214.
Herrero, M., Grace, D., Njuki, J., Johnson, N., Enahoro, D., Silvestri, S., & Rufino, M. C. (2013). The roles of livestock in developing countries. Animal, 7(s1), 3–18.
Howard, J. T., Tiezzi, F., & Maltecca, C. (2022). Machine learning for complex trait prediction in livestock. Journal of Animal Science, 100(3), skac032.
Lassen, J., Gjerris, M., & Sandøe, P. (2020). After Dolly: Ethical limits to the use of biotechnology in farm animals. Trends in Biotechnology, 38(1), 10–14.
Littlejohn, M. D., Henty, K. M., Tiplady, K., Johnson, T., Harland, C., Lopdell, T., Sherlock, R. G., Li, W., Lukefahr, S. D., Shanks, B. C., Garrick, D. J., Snell, R. G., Spelman, R. J., & Davis, S. R. (2014). Functionally reciprocal mutations of the prolactin signalling pathway define hairy and slick cattle. Nature Communications, 5, 5861.
Manzanilla-Pech, C. I. V., Difford, G. F., & Løvendahl, P. (2022). Genetic correlations between feed efficiency and methane emissions in cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 105(4), 3201–3215.
Mench, J. A. (2008). Farm animal welfare in the U.S.A.: Farming practices, research, education, regulation, and assurance programs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 113(4), 298–312.
Meuwissen, T., Hayes, B., & Goddard, M. (2016). Genomic selection: A paradigm shifts in animal breeding. Animal Frontiers, 6(1), 6–14.
Muráni, E., Ponsuksili, S., & Wimmers, K. (2022). NR3C1 polymorphisms and pig stress response. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 6789.
Netea, M. G., Schlitzer, A., & Placek, K. (2023). Trained immunity in livestock. Nature Reviews Immunology, 23(2), 112–126.
Pérez-Enciso, M., Ramayo-Caldas, Y., & Zingaretti, L. M. (2023). Bioinformatics challenges in livestock genomics. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 24(1), bbac503.
Petherick, J. C., Cafe, L. M., & McGilchrist, P. (2023). DRD3 gene and cattle temperament. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 258, 105823.
Pickering, N. K., Oddy, V. H., Basarab, J., Cammack, K., Hayes, B., Hegarty, R., McEwan, J., Miller, S., Pinares-Patiño, C., & de Haas, Y. (2022). Genetic strategies to reduce methane emissions from ruminants. Journal of Animal Science, 100(3), skac032.
Proudfoot, C., Carlson, D. F., Huddart, R., Long, C. R., Pryor, J. H., King, T. J., Lillico, S. G., Mileham, A. J., McLaren, D. G., Whitelaw, C. B. A., & Fahrenkrug, S. C. (2015). Genome edited sheep and cattle. Transgenic Research, 24(1), 147–153.
Pryce, J. E., Parker Gaddis, K. L., & Koeck, A. (2022). Balancing productivity and longevity in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 105(5), 4532–4544.
Renaudeau, D., Collin, A., Yahav, S., de Basilio, V., Gourdine, J. L., & Collier, R. J. (2021). Heat stress adaptation in livestock. Animal, 15(Suppl. 1), 100292.
Roche, D. G., Kruuk, L. E. B., & Teplitsky, C. (2023). Ethical data sharing in animal genomics. Nature Genetics, 55(3), 371–379.
Rojas-Downing, M. M., Nejadhashemi, A. P., Harrigan, T., & Woznicki, S. A. (2017). Climate risk and livestock production in developing countries: A review of the evidence. Climate Risk Management, 16, 145–163.
Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Tait-Burkard, C., Doeschl-Wilson, A., McGrew, M. J., Archibald, A. L., Sang, H. M., Houston, R. D., Whitelaw, C. B. A., & Watson, M. (2018). Livestock 2.0: Genome editing for fitter, healthier, and more productive farmed animals. Genome Biology, 19(1), 204.
Taye, M., Lee, W., Jeon, S., Yoon, J., Dessie, T., Hanotte, O., Mwai, O. A., Kemp, S., Cho, S., Oh, S. J., Lee, H.-K., & Kim, H. (2017). Exploring the genomes of East African Indicine cattle breeds reveals signature of selection for tropical environmental adaptation traits. BMC Genomics, 18(1), 541.
Thompson-Crispi, K., Sargolzaei, M., Ventura, R., & Miglior, F. (2023). CXCR1 variants and mastitis resistance. Journal of Dairy Science, 106(2), 1234–1245.
Thornton, P. K., Kruska, R. L., Henninger, N., Kristjanson, P. M., Reid, R. S., Atieno, F., Odero, A., & Ndegwa, T. (2002). Mapping poverty and livestock in the developing world. International Livestock Research Institute.
Toghiani, S., Fragomeni, B. O., & Lourenco, D. A. L. (2022). High-throughput computing for livestock genomics. BMC Genomics, 23(1), 456.
Torres-Vázquez, J. A., van der Werf, J. H. J., & Clark, S. A. (2021). Genetic and phenotypic trends for milk production and fertility traits of Girolando cattle in Brazil. Livestock Science, 243, 104375.
Van Eenennaam, A. L. (2017). Genetic modification of food animals. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 44, 27–34. Van Tassell, C. P., Smith, T. P. L., Matukumalli, L. K., Taylor, J. F., Schnabel, R. D., Lawley, C. T., Haudenschild, C. D.,
Moore, S. S., Warren, W. C., & Sonstegard, T. S. (2008). SNP discovery and allele frequency estimation by deep sequencing of reduced representation libraries. Nature Methods, 5(3), 247–252.
Wallace, R. J., Sasson, G., Garnsworthy, P. C., Tapio, I., Gregson, E., Bani, P., Huhtanen, P., Bayat, A. R., Strozzi, F., Biscarini, F., & Snelling, T. J. (2019). A heritable subset of the core rumen microbiome dictates dairy cow productivity and emissions. Science Advances, 5(7), eaav8391.
Weigel, K. A., VanRaden, P. M., & Norman, H. D. (2023). Development of the Dairy Wellness Profit Index. Journal of Dairy Science, 106(2), 1123–1135.
Whitworth, K. M., Rowland, R. R. R., Ewen, C. L., Trible, B. R., Kerrigan, M. A., Cino-Ozuna, A. G., Samuel, M. S., Lightner, J. E., McLaren, D. G., Mileham, A. J., Wells, K. D., & Prather, R. S. (2016). Gene-edited pigs are protected from porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Nature Biotechnology, 34(1), 20–22.
Wolff, J., Rabat, A., & Garnett, R. (2023). Federated learning for livestock genomics. Nature Machine Intelligence, 5(3), 221–230.
Zhang, Q., Guldbrandtsen, B., Thomasen, J. R., Lund, M. S., & Sahana, G. (2020). Whole-genome sequence data uncover loss of genetic diversity due to selection. Genetics Selection Evolution, 52(1), 1–12.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Genomics

Journal Section

Review

Authors

Muhammad Younus ^*
0009-0005-5392-7031
Pakistan

Publication Date

July 20, 2026

Submission Date

February 5, 2026

Acceptance Date

February 19, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 7 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.55549/zbs.1882331

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA44SY27BS

APA

Younus, M. (2026). Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems. Zeugma Biological Science, 7(3), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.55549/zbs.1882331

AMA

1.Younus M. Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems. zbs. 2026;7(3):24-38. doi:10.55549/zbs.1882331

Chicago

Younus, Muhammad. 2026. “Genomic Approaches to Improve Sustainability in Livestock Production Systems”. Zeugma Biological Science 7 (3): 24-38. https://doi.org/10.55549/zbs.1882331.

EndNote

Younus M (July 1, 2026) Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems. Zeugma Biological Science 7 3 24–38.

IEEE

[1]M. Younus, “Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems”, zbs, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 24–38, July 2026, doi: 10.55549/zbs.1882331.

ISNAD

Younus, Muhammad. “Genomic Approaches to Improve Sustainability in Livestock Production Systems”. Zeugma Biological Science 7/3 (July 1, 2026): 24-38. https://doi.org/10.55549/zbs.1882331.

JAMA

1.Younus M. Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems. zbs. 2026;7:24–38.

MLA

Younus, Muhammad. “Genomic Approaches to Improve Sustainability in Livestock Production Systems”. Zeugma Biological Science, vol. 7, no. 3, July 2026, pp. 24-38, doi:10.55549/zbs.1882331.

Vancouver

1.Muhammad Younus. Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems. zbs. 2026 Jul. 1;7(3):24-38. doi:10.55549/zbs.1882331

Genomic approaches to improve sustainability in livestock production systems

Abstract

Keywords

Ethical Statement

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite