Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T00:29:17.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of selection on growth, body composition and food intake in mice I. Responses in selected traits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Gillian L. Sharp ,
William G. Hill  and
Alan Robertson
Gillian L. Sharp
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JN
William G. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JN
Alan Robertson
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JN
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Mice were selected for one of three criteria: appetite (A), measured as 4- to 6-week food intake, adjusted by phenotypic regression to minimize change in 4-week body weight, fat percentage (F), using the ratio of gonadal fat pad weight to body weight in 10-week-old males, and total lean mass (protein, P), using the index, body weight in 10-week-old males − (8 × gonadal fat pad weight). For each selection criterion, there were 3 high, 3 low and 3 unselected control lines. At generation 11, the high and low A lines diverged by 17% of the control mean and the realized heritability from within family selection of adjusted food intake was 15%. Selection for this character produced changes in body weight, gross efficiency from 4 to 6 weeks, and percentage of fat, the high lines being heavier, more efficient and less fat than the lows. The high and low F lines diverged by 80% of the control mean and the realized heritability of the ratio of gonadal fat pad weight to body weight was 44%. Selection for this character produced changes in total fat per cent, but little change in percentage protein, body weight, food intake or gross efficiency. The high and low P lines diverged by 40% of the control mean and realized heritability of the lean mass index (10-week weight − [8 × gonadal fat pad weight]) was 51%. Selection for an increase in the index increased body weight at all ages, food intake and 4- to 6-week gross efficiency. There was no change in percentage fat. Responses in the selected traits were not highly correlated, and the different lines provide an opportunity for investigating responses in physiology, metabolism and gene products.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , February 1984 , pp. 75 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

References

REFERENCES

Atkinson, T., Fowler, V. R., Garton, G. A. & Lough, A. K. (1972). A rapid method for the accurate determination of lipid in animal tissues. Analyst 97, 562–567.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eisen, E. J. (1974). The laboratory mouse as a mammalian model for the genetics of growth. Proceedings of the 1st World Congress of Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Madrid, 1, 467–492.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1973). Replicated selection for body weight in mice. Genetical Research 22, 291–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fowler, R. E. (1962). The efficiency of food utilisation, digestibility of food stuffs and energy expenditure of mice selected for large and small body size. Genetical Research 3, 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, J. F. & McCarthy, J. C. (1976). The effects of selection at different ages for high and low body weight on the pattern of fat deposition in mice. Genetical Research 27, 389–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. (1972). Estimation of realised heritabilities from selection experiments. 1. Divergent selection. Biometrics 28, 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, P. (1960). Genetic relations between carcass fat and body weight in mice. Journal of Agricultural Science 55, 317–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagot, S. A., Webb, G. P., Rogers, P. D. & Dickerson, J. W. T. (1980). Estimation of body fat content in normal, chemically obese and obese hyperglycaemic mice. I.C.R.S. Medical Science 8, 93–94.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. C. (1982). The laboratory mouse as a model for animal breeding: a review of selection for increased body weight and litter size. Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Madrid 5, 66–83.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. C. & Doolittle, D. P. (1977). Effects of selection for independent changes in two highly correlated body weight traits in mice. Genetical Research 29, 133–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPhee, C. P. & Neill, A. R. (1976). Changes in the body composition of mice selected for high and low eight week weight. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 47, 21–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pullar, J. D. & Webster, A. J. P. (1977). The energy cost of fat and protein deposition in the rat. British Journal of Nutrition 37, 355–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pym, R. A. E. & Solvyns, A. J. (1979). Selection for food conversion in broilers: body composition of birds selected for increased weight gain, food consumption and food conversion ratio. British Poultry Science 20, 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1979). Side effects of selection for growth in laboratory animals. Livestock Production Science 6, 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1981). The growth of mice selected for large and small size in relation to food intake and the efficiency of conversion. Genetical Research 38, 9–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, D. W. & Bradford, G. E. (1969). Cellular responses to selection for rapid growth in mice. Growth 33, 221–229.Google ScholarPubMed
Rogers, P. & Webb, G. P. (1980). Estimation of body fat in normal and obese mice. British Journal of Nutrition 43, 83–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sutherland, T. M., Biondini, P. E., Haverland, L. H. & Pettus, D. (1970). Selection for growth rate, appetite and efficiency of food utilisation in mice. Journal of Animal Science 31, 1049–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timon, V. M., Eisen, E. J. & Leatherwood, J. M. (1970). Comparisons of ad libitum and restricted feeding of mice selected and unselected for postweaning gain. 2. Carcass composition and energetic efficiency. Genetics 65, 145–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar