Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:52:17.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Possibilities to breed for resistance to nematode parasite infections in small ruminants in tropical production systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2011

S. C. Bishop
S. C. Bishop*
Affiliation:
Division of Genetics and Genomics, The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Gastrointestinal nematode parasitism is the most important disease affecting livestock production systems in developing countries, particularly small ruminant production systems. Of particular importance are infections with the strongyle Haemonchus contortus. Integrated disease control strategies are required, including improved management, nutrition and wise use of anthelmintic chemicals. Increasingly, selection of sheep or goats for improved nematode resistance is viewed as a valuable option to complement other control measures. Breeding for resistance is possible because of the existence of extensive genetic variation in resistance, both within and between breeds of sheep and goats. Such breeding schemes are most likely to be based on choice of appropriate breeds adapted to the local environmental conditions, followed by phenotypic selection for resistance. Goal and selection objective traits are likely to include performance (e.g. growth rate) under conditions of parasite challenge, faecal egg count (FEC) and measures of anaemia. With current technologies, genetic markers are likely to be too expensive and logistically difficult to incorporate into breeding schemes in tropical or developing countries. Genotype by environment interactions may be expected, particularly when comparing animals in environments that differ in the extent of parasite challenge or differ in the quality of available nutrition. However, there is no reason to expect antagonistic genetic relationships between performance and resistance, and selection indices should be readily constructed that improve both performance and resistance. If FEC is decreased, then pasture contamination should also decrease, leading to additional benefits for all sheep grazing the same pasture. Finally, breeding for nematode resistance should lead to lasting and sustained improvements in resistance or tolerance. There is no empirical evidence to suggest that nematodes will evolve rapidly in response to resistant hosts, and mathematical models based on genetic and biological principles also suggest that resistance should be sustainable.

Keywords

sheepgoatsnematodesgeneticsbreeding
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Special Issue 5: Symposium “Sustainable animal production in the tropics” (SAPT), Guadeloupe, France, November 15–18, 2010 , May 2012 , pp. 741 - 747
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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

Baker, RL, Gray, GD 2004. Appropriate breeds and breeding schemes for sheep and goats in the tropics. In Worm control for small ruminants in tropical Asia (ed. RA Sani, GD Gray and RL Baker), pp. 63–95. Australian Center for International Agricultural Research, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Baker, RL, Audho, JO, Adudo, EO, Thorpe, W 2001. Genetic resistance to gastro-intestinal nematode parasites in Galla and Small East African goats in the sub-humid tropics. Animal Science 73, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, RL, Mugambi, JM, Audho, JO, Carles, AB, Thorpe, W 2004. Genotype by environment interactions for productivity and resistance to gastro-intestinal nematode parasites in Red Maasai and Dorper sheep. Animal Science 79, 343–353.Google Scholar
Baker, RL, Nagda, S, Rodriguez-Zas, SL, Southey, BR, Audho, JO, Aduda, EO, Thorpe, W 2003. Resistance and resilience to gastro-intestinal nematode parasites and relationships with productivity of Red Maasai, Dorper and Red Maasai×Dorper crossbred lambs in the sub-humid tropics. Animal Science 76, 119–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beh, KJ, Hulme, DJ, Callaghan, MJ, Leish, Z, Lenane, I, Windon, RG, Maddox, JF 2002. A genome scan for quantitative trait loci affecting resistance to Trichostrongylus colubriformis in sheep. Animal Genetics 33, 97–106.Google Scholar
Bishop, SC, Stear, MJ 1997. Modelling responses to selection for resistance to gastrointestinal parasites in sheep. Animal Science 64, 469–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, SC, Stear, MJ 1999. Genetic and epidemiological relationships between productivity and disease resistance: gastrointestinal parasite infection in growing lambs. Animal Science 69, 515–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, SC, Stear, MJ 2003. Modeling of host genetics and resistance to infectious diseases: understanding and controlling nematode infections. Veterinary Parasitology 115, 147–166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bishop, SC, Morris, CA 2007. Genetics of disease resistance in sheep and goats. Small Ruminant Research 70, 48–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, SC, de Jong, M, Gray, D 2003. Opportunities for incorporating genetic elements into the management of farm animal diseases: policy issues. Background Study Paper No. 18. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Bishop, SC, Jackson, F, Coop, RL, Stear, MJ 2004. Genetic parameters for resistance to nematode infections in Texel lambs. Animal Science 78, 185–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, JB 1994. Integrated pest-management in livestock production. Food Reviews International 10, 195–205.Google Scholar
Chiejina, SN, Behnke, JM 2011. The unique resistance and resilience of the Nigerian West African Dwarf goat to gastrointestinal nematode infections. Parasites and Vectors 4, 12.Google Scholar
Cockett, N, Bishop, SC, Davies, G, Hadfield, T, Eng, S, Miller, J 2005. Use of QTL to determine parasite resistance in sheep. Annual Meeting of the American Society of Animal Science, 24–28 July 2005, Cincinnati, OH, USA.Google Scholar
Coop, RL, Kyriazakis, I 2001. Influence of host nutrition on the development and consequences of nematode parasitism in ruminants. Trends in Parasitology 17, 325–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daetwyler, HD, Pong-Wong, R, Villanueva, B, Woolliams, JA 2010. The impact of genetic architecture on genome-wide evaluation methods. Genetics 185, 1021–1031.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, G 2006. Investigating genetic aspects of the variation in the host response to gastrointestinal parasites in sheep. PhD Thesis, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.Google Scholar
Davies, G, Stear, MJ, Bishop, SC 2005. Genetic relationships between indicator traits and nematode parasite infection levels in 6 month old lambs. Animal Science 80, 143–150.Google Scholar
Davies, G, Stear, MJ, Benothman, M, Abuagob, O, Kerr, A, Mitchell, S, Bishop, SC 2006. Quantitative trait loci associated with parasitic infection in Scottish Blackface sheep. Heredity 96, 252–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diez-Tascon, C, Macdonald, PA, Dodds, KG, McEwan, JC, Crawford, AM 2002. A screen of chromosome 1 for QTL affecting nematode resistance in an ovine outcross population. Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Communication 13–37.Google Scholar
Gruner, L, Bouix, J, Brunel, JC 2004. High genetic correlation between resistance to Haemonchus contortus and to Trichostrongylus colubriformis in INRA 401 sheep. Veterinary Parasitology 119, 51–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gruner, L, Cortet, J, Sauve, C, Limouzin, C, Brunel, JC 2002. Evolution of nematode community in grazing sheep selected for resistance and susceptibility to Teladorsagia circumcincta and Trichostrongylus colubriformis: a 4-year experiment. Veterinary Parasitology 109, 277–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutiérrez-Gil, B, Pérez, J, de la Fuente, LF, Meana, A, Martinez-Valladares, M, San Primitivo, F, Rojo-Vazquez, FA, Arranz, JJ 2010. Genetic parameters for resistance to trichostrongylid infection in dairy sheep. Animal 4, 505–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutiérrez-Gil, B, Pérez, J, Alvarez, L, Martinez-Valladares, M, de la Fuente, LF, Bayon, Y, Meana, A, San Primitivo, F, Rojo-Vazquez, FA, Arranz, JJ 2009. Quantitative trait loci for resistance to trichostrongylid infection in Spanish Churra sheep. Genetics Selection Evolution 41, 46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayes, BJ, Bowman, PJ, Chamberlain, AJ, Goddard, ME 2009. Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 433–443.Google Scholar
Jackson, F, Bartley, D, Bartley, Y, Kenyon, F 2009. Worm control in sheep in the future. Small Ruminant Research 86, 40–45.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, LT, Leathwick, DM, Charleston, PL, Godfrey, PL, Vlassoff, A, Sutherland, IA 1998. Variation between hosts in the developmental success of the free-living stages of trichostrongyle infections of sheep. International Journal for Parasitology 28, 1347–1352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kemper, KE 2010. The implications for the host–parasite relationship when sheep are bred for enhanced resistance to gastrointestinal nematodes. PhD Thesis, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.Google Scholar
Kemper, KE, Elwin, RL, Bishop, SC, Goddard, ME, Woolaston, RR 2009. Adaptation of nematodes to 30 generations of serial passage through resistance or susceptible sheep. International Journal of Parasitology 39, 607–614.Google Scholar
Kemper, KE, Palmer, DG, Liu, SM, Greeff, JC, Bishop, SC, Karlsson, JLE 2010a. Reduction of faecal worm egg count, worm numbers and worm fecundity in sheep selected for worm resistance following artificial infection with Teladorsagia circumcincta and Trichostrongylus colubriformis. Veterinary Parasitology 171, 238–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kemper, KE, Goddard, ME, Bishop, SC 2010b. A simple model of worm adaptation to livestock bred for improved worm resistance. Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Paper 0164.Google Scholar
Kemper, KE, Emery, DL, Bishop, SC, Oddy, H, Hayes, BJ, Dominik, S, Henshall, JM, Goddard, ME 2011. The distribution of SNP marker effects for faecal worm egg count in sheep, and the feasibility of using these markers to predict genetic merit for resistance to worm infections. Genetics Research 93, doi:10.1017/S0016672311000097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leathwick, DM, Atkinson, DS, Miller, CM, Brown, AE, Sutherland, IA 2002. Benefits of reduced larval challenge through breeding for low faecal egg count in sheep. Novel Approaches III. A Workshop Meeting on Helminth Control in Livestock in the New Millennium, 2–5 July 2002. Moredun Research Institute, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
Mandonnet, N, Menendez-Buxadera, A, Arquet, R, Mahieu, M, Bachand, M, Aumont, G 2006. Genetic variability in resistance to gastro-intestinal strongyles during early lactation in Creole goats. Animal Science 82, 283–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, K, Maddox, JF, Lee, SH, Zhang, Y, Kahn, L, Graser, H-U, Gondro, C, Walkden-Brown, SW, van der Werf, JHJ 2009. Genetic mapping of quantitative trait loci for resistance to Haemonchus contortus in sheep. Animal Genetics 40, 262–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meuwissen, THE, Hayes, BJ, Goddard, ME 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157, 1819–1829.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moors, E, Gauly, M 2009. Is the FAMACHA© chart suitable for every breed? Correlations between FANACHA© scores and different traits of mucosa colour in naturally parasite infected sheep breeds. Veterinary Parasitology 166, 108–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreno, CR, Gruner, L, Scala, A, Mura, L, Schibler, L, Amigues, Y, Sechi, T, Jacquiet, P, François, D, Sechi, S, Roig, A, Casu, S, Barillet, F, Brunel, JC, Bouix, J, Carta, A, Rupp, R 2006. QTL for resistance to internal parasites in two designs based on natural and experimental conditions of infection. Proceedings of the 7th World Congress in Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Communication 15-5.Google Scholar
Morris, CA, Vlassoff, A, Bisset, SA, Baker, RL, West, CJ, Hurford, AP 1997. Responses of Romney sheep to selection for resistance or susceptibility to nematode infection. Animal Science 64, 319–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, CA, Bisset, SA, Vlassoff, A, Wheeler, M, West, CJ, Devantier, BP, Mackay, AD 2010. Selecting for resilience in Romney sheep under nematode parasite challenge, 1994–2007. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 53, 245–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, L, Eckersall, PD, Bishop, SC, Pettit, JJ, Huntley, JF, Burchmore, R, Stear, MJ 2010. Genetic variation among lambs in peripheral IgE activity against the larval stages of Teladorsagia circumcincta. Parasitology 137, 1249–1260.Google Scholar
Nimbkar, C, Ghalasi, PM, Swan, AA, Walkden-Brown, SW, Kahn, LP 2003. Evaluation of growth rates and resistance to nematodes of Deccani and Bannur lambs and their crosses with Garole. Animal Science 76, 503–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, KA, McEwan, JC, Dodds, KG, Morris, CA, Crawford, AM 1999. Fine mapping a locus affecting host resistance to internal parasites in sheep. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 13, 91–94.Google Scholar
Perry, BD, McDermott, JJ, Randolph, TF, Sones, KR, Thornton, PK 2002. Investing in animal health research to alleviate poverty. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
Riley, DG, Van Wyk, JA 2009. Genetic parameters for FAMACHA© score and related traits for host resistance/resilience and production at differing severities of worm challenge in a Merino flock in South Africa. Veterinary Parasitology 164, S44–S52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silanikove, N 2000. Effects of heat stress on the welfare of extensively managed domestic ruminants. Livestock Production Science 67, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stear, MJ, McKellar, QA, Mitchell, S, Seeley, C, Bishop, SC 2002. Eosinophilia as a marker of resistance to Teladorsagia circumcincta in Scottish Blackface lambs. Parasitology 124, 553–560.Google Scholar
Stear, MJ, Eckersall, PD, Graham, PA, McKellar, QA, Mitchell, S, Bishop, SC 2001. Fructosamine concentration and resistance to infection with Teladorsagia circumcincta. Parasitology 123, 211–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strain, S, Bishop, SC, Henderson, N, Holmes, PH, McKellar, QA, Mitchell, S, Stear, MJ 2002. The genetic control of IgA activity and its association with parasite resistance in naturally infected sheep. Parasitology 124, 545–552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thornton, PK, van de Steeg, J, Notenbaert, A, Herrero, M 2009. The impacts of climate change on livestock and livestock systems in developing countries: a review of what we know and what we need to know. Agricultural Systems 101, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vagenas, D, Jackson, F, Russel, AJF, Merchant, M, Wright, IA, Bishop, SC 2002. Genetic control of resistance to gastrointestinal parasites in crossbred cashmere producing goats: responses to selection, genetic parameters and relationships with production traits. Animal Science 74, 199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waller, PJ 1997. Anthelmintic resistance. Veterinary Parasitology 72, 391–405.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waller, PJ 2003. The future of anthelmintics in sustainable parasite control programs for livestock. Helminthologia 40, 97–102.Google Scholar
Williams, AR, Greeff, JC, Vercoe, PE, Dobson, RJ, Karlsson, LJE 2010. Merino ewes bred for parasite resistance reduce larval contamination during the peri-parturient period. Animal 4, 122–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woolaston, RR, Piper, LR 1996. Selection of merino sheep for resistance to Haemonchus contortus: genetic variation. Animal Science 62, 451–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolaston, RR, Windon, RG 2001. Selection of sheep for response to Trichostrongylus colubriformis larvae: genetic parameters. Animal Science 73, 41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar