Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T22:25:41.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The direct and maternal components of the response to divergent selection for yearling growth rate in angus cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. M. Herd
R. M. Herd
Affiliation:
NSW Agriculture and Fisheries, Agricultural Research Centre, Trangie, NSW 2823, Australia
Get access

Abstract

A crossmothering experiment was conducted to measure the direct and the maternal components of the response to divergent selection for yearling growth rate in beef cattle. The animals were from three closed lines of Angus cattle. Two lines had been selected since 1974 for either high (high-line) or low (low-line) average daily gain from birth to yearling, and the third line was maintained as a randomly bred control-line. A total of 221 female calves born between 1984 and 1987 was used in the crossmothering experiment, and an additional 113 cows bearing calves in 1988 were used to obtain more records of milk production.

On average, high-line calves born in 1984-87 were 45 kg heavier at weaning (200 days of age) than low-line calves and 65 kg heavier at yearling age, corresponding to a proportional divergence in daily weight gain of 0·29 and 0·32 respectively. The direct component of the response to selection was 0·82 (s.e. 0-05) of the divergence in body weight at weaning and 0·89 (s.e. 0·05) at yearling age. The maternal component was 0·18 (s.e. 0·06) and 0·11 (s.e. 0·04) for weaning and yearling weight respectively. Over the years 1984-88, high-line dams produced 1·15 times the milk of low-line dams and only 1·03 times that of control-line dams. There were small differences in the composition of milk sampled in 1984 which resulted in the milk of high-line dams having a higher content of metabolizable energy (ME) than that of control-line dams. The ME in the milk consumed by the calves from the three selection lines was sufficient to fuel similar proportions of their pre-weaning growth and indicated that the expression of the maternal component of the selection response may be via small differences in the quantity and quality of the milk produced by the dams. Expression of the direct component appeared to be at least partially via differences in appetite of the calves. These results, together with results for sheep, mice and rats, show that the direct component of the response to selection for growth is much larger than the maternal component.

Keywords

cattlegrowth ratematernal effectsselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , December 1990 , pp. 505 - 513
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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

Aaron, D. K., Frahm, R. R. and Buchanan, D. S. 1986. Direct and correlated responses to selection for increased weaning or yearling weight in Angus cattle. II. Evaluation of response. Journal of Animal Science 62: 66–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Bandy, T. R. and Eisen, E. J. 1984. Prenatal and postnatal effects in mouse lines selected for body weight and litter size: performance of postnatal dams and growth of progeny. Journal of Animal Science 59: 896–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buddenberg, B. J., Brown, C. J., Johnson, Z. B. and Honea, R. S. 1986. Maternal behavior of beef cows at parturition. Journal of Animal Science 62: 42–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, G. P. 1987. Genetic relationship between lamb growth and lifetime productivity in Merino sheep. Ph.D. Thesis, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Graser, H. U. and Hammond, K. 1985. Mixed model procedures for the Australian beef industry. I. Multiple-trait model for estimation of breeding values for 200-day and final weights of cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 36: 527–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herd, R. M. 1988. A technique for cross-mothering beef calves which does not affect growth. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 19: 239–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irgang, R., Dillard, E. U., Tess, M. W. and Robison, O. W. 1985. Selection for weaning weight and postweaning gain in Hereford cattle. III. Correlated responses to selection in milk yield, preweaning and postweaning traits. Journal of Animal Science 60: 1156–1164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, P. T. C. and Elliott, R. C. 1972. Dietary energy intake and utilization by young Friesland calves. 2. Digestibility and metabolizable energy contents of whole milk and spray-dried skim milk powder, and energy retentions of calves given these foods. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 10: 125–133.Google Scholar
Kasser, T. G., Mabry, J. W. and Martin, R. J. 1986. Heterotic and maternal effects in L and S growth rats. II. Body weight gains, feed consumption and feed efficiency. Growth 50: 109–117.Google Scholar
Ministry Of Agriculture, Fisheries And Food, Department Of Agriculture And Fisheries For Scotland And Department Of Agriculture For Northern Ireland. 1984. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Reference Book 433. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Mrode, R. A. 1988. Selection experiments in beef cattle. Part 2. A review of responses and correlated responses. Animal Breeding Abstracts 56: 155–167.Google Scholar
Parnell, P. F., Barlow, R. and Tier, B. 1986. Realised responses to divergent selection for yearling growth rate in Angus cattle. Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Animal Production, University of Nebraska, Vol. XI, pp. 330–334.Google Scholar
Pattie, W. A. 1965. Selection for weaning weight in Merino sheep. 2. Correlated responses in other production characters. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 5: 361–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute 1985. SAS User's Guide: Statistics. Version 5 Edition. Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Totusek, R., Arnett, D. W., Holland, G. L. and Whiteman, J. V. 1973. Relation of estimation method, sampling interval and milk composition to milk yield of beef cows and calf gain. Journal of Animal Science 37: 153–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyrrell, H. F. and Reid, J. T. 1965. Prediction of the energy value of cow's milk. Journal of Dairy Science 48: 1215–1223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed