Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:51:56.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of the longevity and lifetime performance of Scottish Blackface ewes and their crosses within hill sheep flocks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2010

R. W. Annett ,
A. F. Carson ,
L. E. R. Dawson ,
D. Irwin ,
A. W. Gordon  and
D. J. Kilpatrick
R. W. Annett*
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, County Down, Northern Ireland, BT26 6DR, UK
A. F. Carson
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, County Down, Northern Ireland, BT26 6DR, UK
L. E. R. Dawson
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, County Down, Northern Ireland, BT26 6DR, UK
D. Irwin
Affiliation:
Agriculture Branch, Agri-food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Large Park, Hillsborough, County Down, Northern Ireland, BT26 6DR, UK
A. W. Gordon
Affiliation:
AFBI Biometrics Division, Newforge Lane, Belfast, BT9 5PX, UK
D. J. Kilpatrick
Affiliation:
AFBI Biometrics Division, Newforge Lane, Belfast, BT9 5PX, UK
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

A study was undertaken to compare the longevity and lifetime lamb output of purebred Scottish Blackface (BF) ewes with a range of crossbred genotypes from Scottish BF dams. For up to five successive breeding seasons, 1143 Scottish BF, Swaledale × BF (SW × BF), North Country Cheviot × BF (CH × BF), Lleyn × BF (LL × BF) and Texel × BF (T × BF) ewes were mated to a range of sire breeds on six hill farms across Northern Ireland. Dentition and lamb output were recorded annually until completion of the study or until the ewe was removed due to death or culling. Timing of mortality and the main reason for culling were also recorded. When survival analysis was undertaken, SW × BF and CH × BF ewes had better longevity (P < 0.05) than BF ewes due to their lower culling rate (P < 0.01) and lower mortality rate (P = 0.06), respectively. The relative proportion of LL × BF and T × BF culled due to infertility was lower (P < 0.05) than SW × BF and CH × BF, while a higher (P < 0.05) proportion of LL × BF and T × BF ewes were culled for prolapses compared with the other breed crosses. SW × BF ewes had consistently higher bite scores (P < 0.001) compared with BF, LL × BF and T × BF, indicating a greater prevalence and degree of overshoot. In ewes aged 5.5 years old, SW × BF also had a higher incidence of tooth loss (P < 0.01) compared with the other breeds. However, the proportion of SW × BF culled due to poor teeth condition was lower (P < 0.05) than BF. Across all breeds, the chances of surviving to their next mating were influenced by ewe breed (P < 0.05), age at mating (P < 0.001), body condition score at weaning (P < 0.001), number of missing teeth (P < 0.001) and average daily live weight gain per litter (P < 0.05). The cumulative number and weight of lambs weaned per ewe over five successive matings was higher (P < 0.05) for crossbred compared with pure BF ewes; however there were no differences in lifetime output between the different crossbred ewes studied. This study demonstrates that the higher lamb output of crossbred hill ewes does not compromise their longevity compared with pure Blackface, resulting in greater total lifetime production. When the crossbred ewes are sired by a second hill breed, longevity may be improved.

Keywords

crossbreedinglamb outputcullingmortality
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , March 2011 , pp. 347 - 355
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

Al-Nakib, FMS, Findlay, RH, Smith, C 1986. Performance of different Scottish Blackface stocks and their crosses. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 107, 119–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Nakib, FMS, Bateman, N, Findlay, RH, Smith, C, Thompson, R 1997. Comparative performance of British hill sheep breeds and their crosses. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 128, 199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annett, RW, Carson, AF, Dawson, LER, Irwin, D, Kilpatrick, D 2010. Effects of breed and age on the performance of crossbred hill ewes sourced from Scottish Blackface dams. Animal; doi:10.1017/S1751731110002090.Google Scholar
Carson, AF, Irwin, D, Kilpatrick, DJ 2001. A comparison of Scottish Blackface and Cheviot ewes and five sire breeds in terms of lamb output at weaning in hill sheep systems. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 137, 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, AF, Dawson, LER, Irwin, D, Kilpatrick, DJ 2004. The effect of management system at lambing and flock genetics on lamb output and labour requirements on lowland sheep farms. Animal Science 78, 439–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casas, E, Freking, BA, Leymaster, KA 2005. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel and Montadale breeds of sheep: V. Reproduction of F1 ewes in spring mating seasons. Journal of Animal Science 83, 2743–2751.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, LER, Carson, AF 2002. Effects of crossbred ewe genotype and ram genotype on ewe prolificacy, lamb viability and lamb output in the lowland sector. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 139, 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland (DARD) 2009. Greenmount Suckler Cows, Beef and Sheep Benchmarking Report 2007/2008.Google Scholar
Donald, HP, Read, JL, Russell, WS 1963. Heterosis in crossbred hill sheep. Animal Production 5, 289–299.Google Scholar
Duckworth, D, Hill, R, Benzie, D, Dalgarno, AC, Robinson, JF 1962. Studies of the dentition of sheep. 1. Clinical observations from investigations into the shedding of permanent incisor teeth by hill sheep. Research in Veterinary Science 3, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission 2006. Study on environmental consequences of sheep and goat farming and of the sheep and goat premium system. Final Report Prepared for the European Commission Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Retrieved July 2006, from http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/sheep2007/full_text_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, NM, Dickerson, GE, Young, LD 1984. Lamb production and its components in pure breeds and composite lines. 2. Breed effects and heterosis. Journal of Animal Science 58, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genstat 2009. Release 12.1. Lawes Agricultural Trust, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, UK.Google Scholar
Gunn, RG 1986. A note on the comparative reproductive performance of Friesland x North Country Cheviot and North Country Cheviot ewes on two levels of pasture prior to mating. Animal Production 42, 287–289.Google Scholar
Hanrahan, JP 1994. Evaluation of crossbred ewe types: ovulation rate and prolificacy. Proceedings of the Irish Grassland and Animal Production Association Annual Meeting, Co. Offaly, Ireland, 21–22pp.Google Scholar
Hanrahan, JP 2004. Performance characteristics of Belclare sheep in pedigree flocks. Teagasc Beef and Sheep Production Research Report, 157pp. from http://www.teagasc.ie/publications/2005/grange_04_res_report_for_web_sept_05.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hanrahan, JP 2007. Association between ewe breed type and longevity in a lowland production system. Proceedings of the Agricultural Research Forum, Tullamore, Co. Offaly, Ireland, 72pp. from http://www.agresearchforum.com/publicationsarf/2007/Page%20072.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hohenboken, WD, Clarke, SE 1981. Genetic, environmental and interaction effects on lamb survival, cumulative lamb production and longevity of crossbred ewes. Journal of Animal Science 53, 966–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litherland, AJ, Lambert, MG, Knight, TW, Cook, T, McDougal, DB 2000. Incidence of bearing in ewes that had a bearing at the preceding lambing. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 60, 44–46.Google Scholar
Low, JC, Sutherland, HK 1987. A census of the prevalence of vaginal prolapse in sheep flocks in the Borders region of Scotland. Veterinary Record 120, 571–575.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGloughlin, P, Curran, S 1969. A comparison of four breeds of sheep as dams for fat lamb production. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 8, 67–79.Google Scholar
Norman, LM, Hohenboken, W 1979. Genetic and environmental effects on internal parasites, foot soundness and attrition in crossbred ewes. Journal of Animal Science 48, 1329–1337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pollott, GE, Stone, DG 2006. The breeding structure of the British sheep industry 2003. Report Prepared for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) for the Review of the National Scrapie Plan, Retrieved 2004, from http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/economics/foodfarm/reports/documents/pollott2003.pdfGoogle Scholar
Russel, AJF, Doney, JM, Gunn, RG 1969. Subjective assessment of body fat in live sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 72, 451–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simm, G, Conington, J, Bishop, SC 1994. Opportunities for genetic improvement of sheep and cattle in the hills and uplands. In Livestock production and land use in hills and uplands (ed. TlJ Lawrence, DS Parker and P Rowlinson), pp. 51–66. Occasional Publication no. 18, British Society of Animal Production, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Steane, DE 1983. The significance of interactions in practical sheep breeding in northern Europe. Livestock Production Science 10, 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, AR, Field, AC, Gunn, RG 1974. Effects of age and state of incisor dentition on body composition and lamb production of sheep grazing hill pastures. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 83, 135–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vesely, JA, Peters, HF 1974. Lamb production from ewes of four breeds and their two-breed and three-breed crosses. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 54, 543–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterhouse, A, Logue, DN, Roger, LC 1992. The effects of increased prolificacy on lamb and ewe mortality in an intensive hill sheep system. In Neonatal survival and growth (ed. MA Varley, PEV Williams and TLJ Lawrence), pp. 176–178. Occasional Publication no. 15, British Society of Animal Production, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar