Abstract
Abstract
Background
Traits recorded on animals that are raised in groups can be analysed with the social effects animal model (SAM). For multiple traits, this model specifies the genetic correlation structure more completely than the animal model (AM). Our hypothesis was that by using the SAM for genetic evaluation of average daily gain (ADG) and backfat thickness (BF), a high rate of improvement in feed conversion ratio (FCR) might be achieved, since unfavourable genetic correlations between ADG and BF reported in a Duroc pig line could be partially avoided. We estimated genetic and non-genetic correlations between BF, ADG and FCR on 1144 pigs using Bayesian methods considering the SAM; and responses to selection indexes that combine estimates of indirect (IGE) and direct (DGE) genetic effects for ADG and BF by stochastic simulation.
Results
Estimates of the ratio of the variance of DGE to the phenotypic variance were 0.31, 0.39 and 0.25 and those of the total genetic variance to the phenotypic variance were 0.63, 0.74 and 0.93 for ADG, BF and FCR, respectively. In spite of this, when the SAM was used to generate data and for the genetic evaluations, the average economic response was worse than that obtained when BV predictions from the AM were considered. The achieved economic response was due to a direct reduction in BF and not to an improvement in FCR.
Conclusions
Our results show that although social genetic effects play an important role in the traits studied, their proper consideration in pig breeding programs to improve FCR indirectly is still difficult. The correlations between IGE and DGE that could help to overcome the unfavourable genetic correlations between DGE did not reach sufficiently high magnitudes; also, the genetic parameters estimates from the SAM have large errors. These two factors penalize the average response under the SAM compared to the AM.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Genetics,Animal Science and Zoology,General Medicine,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference21 articles.
1. Edwards WM, van der Sluis GT, Stevermer EJ. Determinants of profitability in farrow-to-finish swine production. North Cent J Agric Econ. 1989;11:17–25.
2. Merks JWM, Mathur PK, Knol EF. New phenotypes for new breeding goals in pigs. Animal. 2012;6:535–43.
3. Steane DE. Antagonistic traits in pig breeding. Livest Prod Sci. 1981;8:407–18.
4. Suzuki K, Kadowaki H, Shibata T, Uchida H, Nishida A. Selection for daily gain, loin-eye area, backfat thickness and intramuscular fat based on desired gains over seven generations of Duroc pigs. Livest Prod Sci. 2005;97:193–202.
5. Griffing B. Selection in reference to biological groups I individual and group selection applied to populations of unordered groups. Aust J Biol Sci. 1976;20:127–39.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献