Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:40:18.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of MOET in Merino breeding programmes: a practical and economic appraisal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

L. D. Brash ,
N. R. Wray  and
M. E. Goddard
L. D. Brash
Affiliation:
Livestock Improvement Unit, Victorian Institute of Animal Science, 475 Mickleham Road, Attwood, Victoria 3049, Australia
N. R. Wray
Affiliation:
Livestock Improvement Unit, Victorian Institute of Animal Science, 475 Mickleham Road, Attwood, Victoria 3049, Australia
M. E. Goddard
Affiliation:
Livestock Improvement Unit, Victorian Institute of Animal Science, 475 Mickleham Road, Attwood, Victoria 3049, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Commercial application of multiple ovulation and embryo transfer (MOET) technology will be subject to practical constraints and economic rationalism. This study examines use of MOET in its most profitable arena: to breed stud rams which will disseminate genetic improvement widely through multiplier studs to commercial flocks. A deterministic prediction is used to evaluate schemes based on an open nucleus MOET group within a Merino parent stud, taking account of genetic merit and inbreeding. Selection is based on clean fleece weight with an assumed heritability of 0·4. Embryos are collected at a rate equivalent to 3·45 live lambs per donor. Benefits of MOET were calculated from the discounted expressions of rams sold, and compared with the costs incurred.

As the proportion of the flock born from MOET increases, the rate of genetic gain increases rapidly at first, but diminishing returns are observed. The costs ofMOET increase linearly with the number of lambs produced, so the optimum proportion ofMOET lambs is for practical purposes always less than 100%.

Some use of MOET was profitable provided the stud sells sufficient stud rams each year. Sensitivity tests found that other parameters had only a small impact on the optimum level ofMOET. In general however, changes which increased the rate of genetic gain (heritability, flock size) or increased its value (wool price, lower discount rate) increased the optimum number ofMOET lambs.

The results should provide guidelines to optimum investment in MOET for the wool industry. An across flock genetic evaluation scheme is probably necessary to motivate this investment.

Keywords

breeding programmesdeterministic modelsMOETsheepwool
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 241 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Banks, R. G. 1987. The breeding structure of the Merino industry and its influence on genetic progress. In Merino improvement programs in Australia (ed. McGuirk, B. J.), pp. 125–135. Australian Wool Corporation, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Bird, P. J. W. N. and Mitchell, G. 1980. The choice of discount rate in animal breeding investment appraisal. Animal Breeding Abstracts 48: 499–505.Google Scholar
Bulmer, M. G. 1971. The effect of selection on genetic variability. American Naturalist 105: 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, J. W. 1977. Open nucleus breeding schemes. Animal Production 24: 287–305.Google Scholar
James, J. W. 1978. Effective population size in open nucleus breeding schemes. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica 28: 387–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClintock, A. E. and Nicholas, F. W. 1991. The implications of advanced breeding techniques. Australian Meat and Livestock Research and Development Corporation Project Report US.016.Google Scholar
Maxwell, W. M. C., Szell, A., Hunton, J. R. and Ryan, J. P. 1990. Artificial breeding: embryo transfer and cloning. In Reproductive physiology of Merino sheep: concepts and consequences (ed. Oldham, C. M., Martin, G. B., Purvis, I. W.), pp. 217–237. University of Western Australia, Perth.Google Scholar
Mueller, J. P. and James, J. W. 1983. Effects of reduced variance due to selection in open nucleus breeding systems. Australian journal of Agricultural Research 34: 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. 1961. Inbreeding in artificial selection programmes. Genetical Research, Cambridge 2: 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. 1986. Use of embryo transfer in genetic improvement of sheep. Animal Production 42: 81–88.Google Scholar
Wade, C. and Goddard, M. E. 1994. How much is a genetically superior ram worth? Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 45: 403–413.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A., Wray, N. R. and Thompson, R. 1993. Prediction of long-term contributions and inbreeding in populations undergoing mass selection. Genetical Research, Cambridge 62: 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, N. R. and Goddard, M. E. 1994. MOET breeding schemes for wool sheep. 1. Design alternatives. Animal Production 59: 71–86.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. 1931. Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics, USA 16: 97–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed