Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:58:47.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An economic appraisal of pig improvement in Great Britain 2. Factors affecting estimated benefits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. Smith ,
A. Gibson  and
G. Mitchell
C. Smith
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
A. Gibson
Affiliation:
East of Scotland College of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
G. Mitchell
Affiliation:
Technological Economics Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA
Get access

Abstract

In a previous paper, pig improvement in Great Britain was assessed for the value of genetic improvements in growth-carcass traits. The benefits are substantial, estimated at €100 × 10 per year. Here, several factors that possibly affect these estimated benefits are examined. These include: 1. comparisons in production systems optimal to improved and to unimproved stocks; 2. interaction of station and farm performance; 3. changes in correlated traits, especially sow weight; and 4. uncertainty about future husbandry and marketing needs.

The conclusion is that, despite appreciable documentation and evaluation, and although the overall benefits are certainly large, there is room for uncertainty about the actual value of past pig improvement work in Great Britain.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , October 1982 , pp. 225 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bampton, P. R., Curran, M. K. and Kempson, R. E. 1977. A comparison of ‘on-farm’ and station testing in pigs. Anim. Prod. 25: 83–94.Google Scholar
Hetzer, H. O. and Miller, R. H. 1972. Correlate d responses of various body measurements in swine selected for high and low fatness. J. Anim. Sci. 35: 743–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, G. 1982. An economic appraisal of pig improvement in Great Britain. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Stirling.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G., Smith, C., Makower, M. and Bird, P. J. W. N. 1982. An economic appraisal of pig improvement in Great Britain. 1. Genetic and production aspects. Anim. Prod. 35: 215–224.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. J. 1979. Evaluation of genetic merit of pigs in different environmental conditions. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. London.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1968. Time taken to mature in relation to mature weight fo r sexes, strains and species of domesticated mammals and birds. Anim. Prod. 10: 157–169.Google Scholar
Webb, A. J. and King, J. W. B. 1979. The influenc e of weaning regime on central testing station performance in pigs. Anim. Prod. 29: 203–212.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. and Fawcett, R. H. 1976. Theoretica l aspects of a flexible model to simulate protein and lipid growth in pigs. Anim. Prod. 22: 87–96.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Franklin, M. F. and Pearce, B. S. 1980. Fat changes in breeding sows. Anim. Prod. 31: 183–190.Google Scholar