Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T05:28:31.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Genetic and nutritional effects on age at first oestrus of gilts selected for components of efficient lean growth rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

N. D. Cameron
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
J. C. Kerr
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
G. B. Garth
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
R. L. Sloan
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
Get access

Abstract

Ages at first behavioural oestrus and at elevated plasma progesterone concentration were measured in three selection groups, after seven generations of divergent selection for lean growth rate (LGA), lean food conversion (LFC) and daily food intake (DFI) in a population of Large White pigs. First physiological oestrus was defined to have occurred when a blood plasma progesterone concentration of at least 1 μg/l was detected from weekly sampling of gilts. The study consisted of 146 gilts, which were given 0·75 , 0·81 , 0·88 , 0·94 or 1·0 g/g of daily ad-libitum food intake during performance test and then 1.9, 2.05, 2.2, 2.35 or 2.5 kg/day, respectively, until conception, to determine if there were differences between selection lines in their sensitivity to changes in nutritional inputs.

Responses in oestrus and performance test traits were dependent on selection group. First physiological oestrus was later with selection for high LFC than for low LFC (234 v. 215, s.e.d. 9.1 days) but there was no significant response within each of the LG A (224 v. 226 days) and DFI (218 v. 206 days) selection groups. The probability of exhibiting oestrous behaviour signs at first physiological oestrus was significantly lower in the high LG A line (0·62 v. 0·93 or 0·5 v. 2.5, s.e.d. 0·75 on the logit scale) than in the low line but there were no responses in the LFC and DFI groups. For animals exhibiting oestrous behaviour signs at first physiological oestrus, there were no significant responses in oestrous behaviour score for the three selection groups. Live weight at first physiological oestrus in the LFC and LG A selection groups was greater in the high lines than in the low lines (120 v. 109 and 123 v. 112, s.e.d. 4.3 kg) but not in the DFI selection group (116 v. 111 kg). Responses in ultrasonic backfat (-7.3, -8.2 and 5.0, s.e.d. 1.5 mm) and muscle depth (4.9, 6.1 and -3.5, s.e.d. 1.4 mm) at first physiological oestrus were of similar magnitude in the LGA, LFC and DFI selection groups.

Increasing the ration (amount of food offered) did not have a linear effect on performance test traits and reproductive development, such that ration had to be included in the model as a fixed effect, rather than a covariate. There was no significant effect of ration or of selection line with ration interaction for traits associated with first oestrus.

Selection for lean growth rate had no adverse effect on reproductive development, unlike selection for lean food conversion. Detection of first oestrus with oestrous behaviour signs combined with physiological assessment may be required in genotypes selected exclusively for lean growth rate, rather than relying only on observed behavioural signs of oestrus.

Ages at first behavioural oestrus and at elevated plasma progesterone concentration were measured in three selection groups, after seven generations of divergent selection for lean growth rate (LGA), lean food conversion (LFC) and daily food intake (DFI) in a population of Large White pigs. First physiological oestrus was defined to have occurred when a blood plasma progesterone concentration of at least 1 μg/l was detected from weekly sampling of gilts. The study consisted of 146 gilts, which were given 0·75 , 0·81 , 0·88 , 0·94 or 1·0 g/g of daily ad-libitum food intake during performance test and then 1.9, 2.05, 2.2, 2.35 or 2.5 kg/day, respectively, until conception, to determine if there were differences between selection lines in their sensitivity to changes in nutritional inputs.

Responses in oestrus and performance test traits were dependent on selection group. First physiological oestrus was later with selection for high LFC than for low LFC (234 v. 215, s.e.d. 9.1 days) but there was no significant response within each of the LG A (224 v. 226 days) and DFI (218 v. 206 days) selection groups. The probability of exhibiting oestrous behaviour signs at first physiological oestrus was significantly lower in the high LG A line (0·62 v. 0·93 or 0·5 v. 2.5, s.e.d. 0·75 on the logit scale) than in the low line but there were no responses in the LFC and DFI groups. For animals exhibiting oestrous behaviour signs at first physiological oestrus, there were no significant responses in oestrous behaviour score for the three selection groups. Live weight at first physiological oestrus in the LFC and LG A selection groups was greater in the high lines than in the low lines (120 v. 109 and 123 v. 112, s.e.d. 4.3 kg) but not in the DFI selection group (116 v. 111 kg). Responses in ultrasonic backfat (-7.3, -8.2 and 5.0, s.e.d. 1.5 mm) and muscle depth (4.9, 6.1 and -3.5, s.e.d. 1.4 mm) at first physiological oestrus were of similar magnitude in the LGA, LFC and DFI selection groups. Increasing the ration (amount of food offered) did not have a linear effect on performance test traits and reproductive development, such that ration had to be included in the model as a fixed effect, rather than a covariate. There was no significant effect of ration or of selection line with ration interaction for traits associated with first oestrus. Selection for lean growth rate had no adverse effect on reproductive development, unlike selection for lean food conversion. Detection of first oestrus with oestrous behaviour signs combined with physiological assessment may be required in genotypes selected exclusively for lean growth rate, rather than relying only on observed behavioural signs of oestrus.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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.)

Footnotes

Present address: PPL Theapeutics, Roslin, EH25 9PP.

References

Beltranena, E., Aherne, F. X., Foxcroft, G. R. and Kirkwood, R. N. 1991. Effects of pre- and post-pubertal feeding on production traits in first and second estrus in gilts. Journal of Animal Science 69: 886893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bidanel, J. P., Gruand, J. and Legault, C. 1996. Genetic variability of age and weight at puberty, ovulation rate and embryo survival in gilts and relations with production traits. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 28: 103115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boland, M. P., Foulkes, J. A., MacDonell, H. F. and Sauer, M. J. 1985. Plasma progesterone concentrations in superovulated heifers determined by enzyme-immunoassay and radioimmunoassay. British Veterinary Journal 141: 409415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, N. D. 1994. Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs. 1. Selection pressure applied and direct responses in a Large White herd. Animal Production 59: 251262.Google Scholar
Cameron, N. D. and Curran, M. K. 1995a. Genotype with feeding regime interaction in pigs divergently selected for components of efficient lean growth rate. Animal Science 61: 123132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, N. D. and Curran, M. K. 1995b. Responses in carcass composition to divergent selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs. Animal Science 61: 347359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, N. D., Curran, M. K. and Kerr, J. C. 1994. Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs. 3. Responses to selection with a restricted feeding regime. Animal Production 59: 271279.Google Scholar
Cameron, N. D. and MacLeod, M. G. 1997. Genotype with nutrition interaction for performance test traits in pigs selected for lean growth rate. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, 1997, p. 29.Google Scholar
Eliasson, L., Rydhmer, L., Einarsson, S. and Andersson, K. 1991. Relationships between puberty and production traits in the gilt. 1. Age at puberty. Animal Reproduction Science 25: 143154.Google Scholar
Genstat 5.3 Committee. 1993. Genstat 5.3 reference manual. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Irgang, R., Scheid, I. R., Favero, J. A. and Wentz, I. 1992. Daily gain and age and weight at puberty in purebred and crossbred Duroc, Landrace and Large White gilts. Livestock Production Science 32: 3140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlbom, L., Einarsson, S. and Edqvist, L.-E. 1982. Attainment of puberty in female pigs: clinical appearance and patterns of progesterone, oestradiol-17ß and LH. Animal Reproduction Science 4: 301312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, J. C. and Cameron, N. D. 1995. Reproductive performance of pigs selected for components of efficient lean growth. Animal Science 60: 281290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, J. C. and Cameron, N. D. 1996. Genetic and phenotypic relationships between performance test and reproduction traits in Large White pigs. Animal Science 62: 531540.Google Scholar
King, R. H. 1989. Effect of live weight and body composition of gilts at 24 weeks of age on subsequent reproductive efficiency. Animal Production 49: 109115.Google Scholar
Kirkwood, R. N. and Aherne, F. X. 1985. Energy intake, body composition and reproductive performance of the gilt. Journal of Animal Science 60: 15181529.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newton, E. A. and Mahan, D. C. 1992. Effect of feed intake during late development on pubertal onset and resulting body composition in crossbred gilts. Journal of Animal Science 70: 37743780.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, H. D. and Thompson, R. 1971. Recovery of interblock information when block sizes are unequal. Biometrika 58: 545554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rydhmer, L., Eliasson-Selling, L., Johansson, K., Stern, S. and Andersson, K. 1994. A genetic study of estrus symptoms at puberty and their relationship to growth and leanness in gilts. Journal of Animal Science 72: 19641970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schall, R. 1991. Estimation in generalised linear models with random effects. Biometrika 78: 719727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, T. M. 1965. The correlations between feed efficiency and rate of gain, a ratio and its denominator. Biometrics 21: 739749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1985. Use of genetic size-scaling in evaluation of animals growth. Journal of Animal Science 61: (suppl. 2) 118143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Limen, T. A. and Aherne, F. X. 1987. Effect of long term feed restriction on age at puberty in gilts. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 67: 797801.Google Scholar
Welham, S. J. 1993. The GLMM procedure. In Genstat 5, procedure library manual release 3 (1), pp. 187192.Google Scholar