Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:09:56.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partition of genetic trends by origin in Landrace and Large-White pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2015

D. Škorput ,
G. Gorjanc ,
A. Kasap  and
Z. Luković
D. Škorput*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska 25, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
G. Gorjanc
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, 1230 Domžale, Slovenia Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Roslin Institute, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, EH25 9RG, Scotland, United Kingdom
A. Kasap
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska 25, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
Z. Luković
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetošimunska 25, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to analyse the effectiveness of genetic improvement via domestic selection and import for backfat thickness and time on test in a conventional pig breeding programme for Landrace (L) and Large-White (LW) breeds. Phenotype data was available for 25 553 L and 10 432 LW pigs born between 2002 and 2012 from four large-scale farms and 72 family farms. Pedigree information indicated whether each animal was born and registered within the domestic breeding programme or has been imported. This information was used for defining the genetic groups of unknown parents in a pedigree and the partitioning analysis. Breeding values were estimated using a Bayesian analysis of an animal model with and without genetic groups. Such analysis enabled full Bayesian inference of the genetic trends and their partitioning by the origin of germplasm. Estimates of genetic group indicated that imported germplasm was overall better than domestic and substantial changes in estimates of breeding values was observed when genetic group were fitted. The estimated genetic trends in L were favourable and significantly different from zero by the end of the analysed period. Overall, the genetic trends in LW were not different from zero. The relative contribution of imported germplasm to genetic trends was large, especially towards the end of analysed period with 78% and 67% in L and from 50% to 67% in LW. The analyses suggest that domestic breeding activities and sources of imported animals need to be re-evaluated, in particular in LW breed.

Keywords

pigsgenetic trendoriginpartitionimport
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Supplement 10 , October 2015 , pp. 1605 - 1609
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

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

García-Cortés, LA, Martinez-Ávila, JC and Toro, MA 2008. Partition of the genetic trend to validate multiple selection decisions. Animal 2, 821–824.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gorjanc, G, Hely, FS and Amer, PR 2012. Partitioning international genetic trends by origin in Holstein bulls. ICAR, Cork, Ireland.Google Scholar
Gorjanc, G, Potočnik, K, García-Cortés, LA, Jakobsen, J and Dürr, J 2011. Partitioning of international genetic trends by origin in Brown Swiss bulls. Interbull Bulletin 44, 81–86.Google Scholar
Henderson, CR 1973. Sire evaluation and genetic trends. In Proceedings of Animal Breeding and Genetic Symposium in Honour of J. L. Lush, ASAS and ADSA, Champaign, IL, USA, pp. 10–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, CR 1976. A simple method for computing the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in prediction of breeding values. Biometrics 32, 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, CR 1984. Applications of linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
Legarra, A, Varona, L and Lopéz de Maturana, E 2011. TM: threshold model. Retrieved January 15, 2015, from http://genoweb.toulouse.inra.fr/~alegarra.Google Scholar
Peškovičová, D, Groeneveld, E and Wolf, J 2004. Effect of genetic groups on the efficiency of selection in pigs. Livestock Production Science 88, 213–222.Google Scholar
Phocas, F and Laloe, D 2004. Should genetic groups be fitted in BLUP evaluation? Practical answer for the French AI beef sire evaluation. Genetic Selection Evolution 36, 325–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pieramati, C and Van Vleck, LD 1993. Effect of genetic groups on estimates of additive genetic variance. Journal of Animal Science 71, 66–70.Google Scholar
Quaas, RL 1988. Additive genetic model with groups and relationships. Journal of Dairy Science 71, 1338–1345.Google Scholar
Quaas, RL and Pollak, EJ 1981. Modified equations for sire models with groups. Journal of Dairy Science 64, 1868–1872.Google Scholar
Vandenplas, J and Gengler, N 2012. Comparison and improvements of different Bayesian procedures to integrate external information into genetic evaluations. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 1513–1526.Google Scholar
Van Vleck, LD 1990. Breeding value prediction with maternal genetic groups. Journal of Animal Science 68, 3998–4013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vincek, D, Gorjanc, G, Luković, Z, Malovrh, Š, Poljak, F and Kovač, M 2003. Estimated of genetic parameters for time on test and backfat thickness for gilts from field test. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus 68, 109–113.Google Scholar
Westell, RA, Quaas, RL and van Vleck, LD 1988. Genetic groups in an animal model. Journal of Dairy Science 71, 1310–1318.Google Scholar
Wolf, J and Wolfová, M 2012. Impact of genetic groups and herd-year-season fixed/random on genetic parameter estimates from large data sets in pigs. Research in Pig Breeding 6, 88–96.Google Scholar
Woolliams, JA, Bijma, P and Villanueva, B 1999. Expected genetic contributions and their impact on gene flow and genetic gain. Genetics 153, 1009–1020.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Škorput supplementary material

Table S1 and Figures S1-S4

Download Škorput supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 438 KB