Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T02:00:55.335Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Estimates of genetic parameters for pre-weaning and post-weaning growth traits of Chios lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. P. Mavrogenis
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
A. Louca
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
O. W. Robison
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
Get access

Abstract

Data on 792 Chios lambs born during the 1972/73 and 1973/74 lambing seasons were used to estimate genetic and phenotypic parameters for birth weight, weaning weight, age at weaning, pre-weaning daily gain, body weight at 5, 10, 15 and 20 weeks of age, and postweaning daily gain. Body weight at 15 weeks of age had the highest heritability estimate (0·73 ± 0·17) and that of post-weaning daily gain was also high (0·56 ± 0·15). Selection for either weight at 15 weeks or post-weaning daily gain would be expected to yield a greater response than selection for pre-weaning daily gain or weaning weight. Genetic correlations among weights and/or gains were positive (approximately 0·20). Phenotypic correlations among weights and gains were generally higher than genetic correlations. However, the correlation between pre— and post-weaning daily gain was small (0·08). Likewise, post-weaning daily gain had low correlations with all weights before 10 weeks. Age at weaning had moderate negative associations with all weights but a very low positive correlation with post-weaning daily gain.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1980

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

Dickerson, G. E. 1959. Techniques and Procedures in Animal Science Research. American Society of Animal Science, Albany, NY.Google Scholar
Ercanbrack, S. K. and Price, D. A. 1972. Selecting for weight and rate of gain in noninbred lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 34: 713725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gjedrem, T. 1967. Phenotypic and genetic parameters for weight of lambs at five ages. Acta Agric. scand. 17: 199216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, W. R. 1975. Least squares analysis of data with unequal subclass numbers. U.S. Dep. Agric, ARS-H–4.Google Scholar
King, J. W. B. and Young, G. B. 1955. A study of three breeds of sheep wintered in four environments. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 45: 331338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawlor, M. J., Louca, A. and Mavrogenis, A. 1974. The effect of three suckling regimes on the lactation performance of Cyprus fat-tailed, Chios and Awassi sheep and the growth rate of the lambs. Anim. Prod. 18: 293299.Google Scholar
Louca, A. 1972. The effect of suckling regime on growth rate and lactation performance of the Cyprus fat-tailed and Chios sheep. Anim. Prod. 15: 5359.Google Scholar
Mason, I. L. 1967. Sheep Breeds of the Mediterranean. Constable, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Mavrogenis, A. P. 1977. Genetic analysis of feed efficiency in beef cattle. Ph.D. Thesis, Dep. Anim. Sci., N. Carol. St. Univ., Raleigh N. C.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1975. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. No. 5, Nutrient Requirements of Sheep. 5th ed. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. 1959. The sampling variance of the genetic correlation coefficient. Biometrics 15: 469485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terrill, C. E. 1951. Effectiveness of selection for economically important traits of sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 10: 1718 (Abstr.).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thrift, F. A., Whiteman, J. V. and Kratzer, D. D. 1973. Genetic analysis of preweaning and postweaning lamb growth traits. J. Anim. Sci. 36: 640643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vesely, J. A. and Robison, O. W. 1970. Genotype-sex interactions in sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 31: 273277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed