Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:59:09.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of inbreeding on reproduction in mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. G. Beilharz
R. G. Beilharz
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia
Get access

Abstract

An unselected, non-inbred population of laboratory mice has been propagated for 25 generations by 20 pairs (families) of mice, each leaving one son and one daughter selected at random from the litter. The daughter was given the family number of her dam, while her mate came from another family varying systematically in different generations. The breeding plan precluded any possibility of common ancestry for five generations. In later generations the inbreeding coefficient rose at an average rate expected from a population with an effective number of approximately 80, to approximately 0·13 in generation 25. The rise occurred in cycles, repeating every five generations. Data are presented to demonstrate that overall reproduction (total weight of young produced at 9 weeks of age, per female mated) and the components of survival from birth to 9 weeks, survival from sexing (3 weeks) to 9 weeks separately for males and females, and 9-week weight of males and females, were each sensitive to changes in inbreeding coefficient. In contrast, conception rate, litter size (live young born) and sex ratio did not reflect changes in the inbreeding coefficient. The magnitude of the depression in overall reproduction was substantially greater than that in any of the affected components.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , February 1982 , pp. 49 - 54
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

Beilharz, R. G. 1972. Studies in mouse breeding. 1. Description of mouse stocks in the School of Agriculture, University of Melbourne. Occ. Pap. Section Anim. Prod., Sch. Agric, Univ. Melb., No. 1.Google Scholar
Bereskin, B., Shelby, C. E., Rowe, K. E., Rempel, W. E., Dettmers, A. E. and Norton, H. W. 1970. Inbreeding and swine productivity in Minnesota experimental herds. J. Anim. Sci. 31: 278–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, J. C. and Falconer, D. S. 1960. Inbreeding depression and heterosis of litter size in mice. Genet. Res. 1: 262–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickinson, F. N. and Touchberry, R. W. 1961. Livability of purebred vs. crossbred dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 44: 879–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doney, J. M. 1957. Effects of inbreeding on four families of Peppin Merinos. Aust. J. agric. Res. 8: 299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doney, J. M. 1958. Effects of inbreeding on four families of Peppin Merinos. II. The influence of inbreeding on age trends. Aust. J. agric. Res. 9: 252–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doney, J. M. 1959. The effects of inbreeding on four families of Peppin Merinos. III. The influence of crude pituitary extract on inbred lambs. Aust. J. agric. Res. 10: 97–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doney, J. M. 1961. Effects of inbreeding on four families of Peppin Merinos. IV. The expression of heterosis. Aust. J. agric. Res. 12: 362–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1960a. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1960b. The genetics of litter size in mice. J. cell. comp. Physiol. 56: Suppl. 1, pp. 153–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. K. and Omtvedt, I. T. 1975. Maternal heterosis in swine: reproductive performance and dam productivity. J. Anim. Sci. 40: 29–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lax, J. and Brown, G. H. 1967. The effects of inbreeding, maternal handicap, and range in age on 10 fleece and body characteristics in Merino rams and ewes. Aust. J. agric. Res. 18: 689–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, J. C. 1967. The effects of inbreeding on the components of litter size in mice. Genet. Res. 10: 73–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'ferrall, G. J., Hetzer, H. O. and Gaines, J. A. 1968. Heterosis in preweaning traits of swine. J. Anim. Sci. 27:17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. 1965. Some contributions of the laboratory mouse to animal breeding research. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 33: 339–353; 515-526.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. 1954. Inbreeding and performance in British Friesian cattle. Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod., pp. 87–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Helen N. 1969. Genetic improvement of reproduction rate in sheep. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 37: 545–563.Google Scholar
Walker, I. J., Beilharz, R. G. and Dunkin, A. C. 1972. A genetic study of reproductive performance of sows in a large commercial pig herd. Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 9: 147–152.Google Scholar
Yao, T. S. and Eaton, O. N. 1954. Heterosis in the birth weight and slaughter weight in rabbits. Genetics, Princeton 39: 667–676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed