Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:14:38.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic gain of pure line selection and combined crossbred purebred selection with constrained inbreeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

P. Bijma ,
J.A. Woolliams  and
J.A.M. van Arendonk
P. Bijma
Affiliation:
Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Wageningen Institute of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
J.A. Woolliams
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
J.A.M. van Arendonk
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
Get access

Abstract

Using deterministic methods, rates of genetic gain (Δ G) and inbreeding (Δ F) were compared between pure line selection (PLS) and combined crossbred purebred selection (CCPS), for the sire line of a three-way crossbreeding scheme. Purebred performance and crossbred performance were treated as genetically correlated traits assuming the infinitesimal model. Breeding schemes were compared at a fixed total number of purebred selection candidates, i.e. including crossbred information did not affect the size of the purebred nucleus. Selection was by truncation on estimated breeding values for crossbred performance. Rates of genetic gain were predicted using a pseudo-BLUP selection index. Rates of inbreeding were predicted using recently developed methods based on long-term genetic contributions. Results showed that changing from PLS to CCPS may increase ΔF by a factor of 2·14. In particular with high heritabilities and low purebred-crossbred genetic correlations, CCPS requires a larger number of parents than PLS, to avoid excessive ΔF. The superiority of CCPS over PLS was judged by comparing ΔG from both selection strategies at the same ΔF. At the same ΔF, CCPS was superior to PLS and the superiority of CCPS was only moderately reduced compared with the situation without a restriction on ΔF. This paper shows that the longterm genetic contribution theory can be used to balance ΔF and ΔG in animal breeding schemes within very limited computing time.

Keywords

crossbreedingeffective population sizegenetic gaininbreedingselection.
Type
Breeding and genetics
Information
Animal Science , Volume 72 , Issue 2 , April 2001 , pp. 225 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2001

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

Baumung, R., Sölkner, J. and Essl, A. 1997. Selection response according to the use of pure- and/or crossbred information in crossbred animals with varying levels of dominance and additive by additive effects. Book of abstracts of the 48th annual meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, August 25-28, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Bijma, P. and Arendonk, J. A. M. van. 1998. Maximizing genetic gain for the sire line of a crossbreeding scheme utilizing both purebred and crossbred information. Animal Science 66: 529–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bijma, P. and Woolliams, J. A. 2000. Prediction of rates of inbreeding in populations selected on Best Linear Unbiased Prediction of breeding value. Genetics 156: 361–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulmer, M. G. 1971. The effect of selection on genetic variability. The American Naturalist 105: 201–211.Google Scholar
Grundy, B., Villanueva, B. and Woolliams, J. A. 1998. Dynamic selection procedures for constrained inbreeding and their consequences for pedigree development. Genetical Research, Cambridge 72: 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1998. Inferences from evolutionary biology to livestock breeding1. In Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, January 11-16, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Jiang, X. and Groen, A. F. 1999. Combined crossbred and purebred selection for reproduction traits in a broiler dam line. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 116: 111–125.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1991. Reduction of selection differentials in finite populations with a nested full-half-sib family structure. Biometrics 47: 195–203.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1997. Maximizing the response of selection with a predefined rate of inbreeding. Journal of Animal Science 75: 934–940.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spilke, J., Groeneveld, E. and Mielenz, N. 1998. Joint purebred and crossbred (co)variance component estimation with a pseudo multiple trait model: loss in efficiency. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 115: 341–350.Google Scholar
Turelli, M. and Barton, N. H. 1994. Genetic and statistical analyses of strong selection on polygenic traits: what, me normal? Genetics 138: 913–941.Google Scholar
Uimari, P. and Gibson, J. P. 1998. The value of crossbreeding information in selection of poultry under a dominance model. Animal Science 66: 519–528.Google Scholar
Wei, M. and Werf, J. H. J.van der. 1993. Animal model estimation of additive and dominance variances in egg production traits of poultry. Journal of Animal Science 71: 57–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wei, M. and Werf, J. H. J.van der. 1994. Maximizing genetic response in crossbreds using both purebred and crossbred information. Animal Production 59: 401–413.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A. and Bijma, P. 2000. Predicting rates of inbreeding in populations undergoing selection. Genetics 154: 1851–1864.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A., Bijma, P. and Villanueva, B. 1999. Expected genetic contributions and their impact on gene flow and genetic gain. Genetics 153: 1009–1020.Google Scholar
Wray, N. R. and Hill, W. G. 1989. Asymptotic rates of response from index selection. Animal Production 49: 217–227.Google Scholar
Wright, S. 1969. Evolution and the genetics of populations, volume 2. The theory of gene frequencies. University of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar