9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of genotype and environment on the productive and survivability traits of lambs under a community-based management system

      , , , ,
      Journal of Agriculture and Food Research
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges.

          A new technology called genomic selection is revolutionizing dairy cattle breeding. Genomic selection refers to selection decisions based on genomic breeding values (GEBV). The GEBV are calculated as the sum of the effects of dense genetic markers, or haplotypes of these markers, across the entire genome, thereby potentially capturing all the quantitative trait loci (QTL) that contribute to variation in a trait. The QTL effects, inferred from either haplotypes or individual single nucleotide polymorphism markers, are first estimated in a large reference population with phenotypic information. In subsequent generations, only marker information is required to calculate GEBV. The reliability of GEBV predicted in this way has already been evaluated in experiments in the United States, New Zealand, Australia, and the Netherlands. These experiments used reference populations of between 650 and 4,500 progeny-tested Holstein-Friesian bulls, genotyped for approximately 50,000 genome-wide markers. Reliabilities of GEBV for young bulls without progeny test results in the reference population were between 20 and 67%. The reliability achieved depended on the heritability of the trait evaluated, the number of bulls in the reference population, the statistical method used to estimate the single nucleotide polymorphism effects in the reference population, and the method used to calculate the reliability. A common finding in 3 countries (United States, New Zealand, and Australia) was that a straightforward BLUP method for estimating the marker effects gave reliabilities of GEBV almost as high as more complex methods. The BLUP method is attractive because the only prior information required is the additive genetic variance of the trait. All countries included a polygenic effect (parent average breeding value) in their GEBV calculation. This inclusion is recommended to capture any genetic variance not associated with the markers, and to put some selection pressure on low-frequency QTL that may not be captured by the markers. The reliabilities of GEBV achieved were significantly greater than the reliability of parental average breeding values, the current criteria for selection of bull calves to enter progeny test teams. The increase in reliability is sufficiently high that at least 2 dairy breeding companies are already marketing bull teams for commercial use based on their GEBV only, at 2 yr of age. This strategy should at least double the rate of genetic gain in the dairy industry. Many challenges with genomic selection and its implementation remain, including increasing the accuracy of GEBV, integrating genomic information into national and international genetic evaluations, and managing long-term genetic gain.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Successes and failures of small ruminant breeding programmes in the tropics: a review

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Factors affecting birth weight in sheep: maternal environment.

              Knowledge of factors affecting variation in birth weight is especially important given the relationship of birth weight to neonatal and adult health. The present study utilises two large contemporary datasets in sheep of differing breeds to explore factors that influence weight at term. For dataset one (Study 1; n=154 Blue-faced Leicester x Swaledale (Mule) and 87 Welsh Mountain ewes, 315 separate cases of birth weight), lamb birth weight as the outcome measure was related to maternal characteristics and individual energy intake of the ewe during specified periods of gestation, i.e. early (1-30 days; term ~147 days gestation), mid (31-80 days) or late (110-147 days) pregnancy. For dataset two (Study 2; n=856 Mule ewes and 5821 cases of birth weight), we investigated using multilevel modelling the influence of ewe weight, parity, barrenness, lamb sex, litter size, lamb mortality and year of birth on lamb birth weight. For a subset of these ewes (n=283), the effect of the ewes' own birth weight was also examined. Interactions between combinations of variables were selectively investigated. Litter size, as expected, had the single greatest influence on birth weight with other significant effects being year of birth, maternal birth weight, maternal nutrition, sex of the lamb, ewe barrenness and maternal body composition at mating. The results of the present study have practical implications not only for sheep husbandry but also for the increased knowledge of factors that significantly influence variation in birth weight; as birth weight itself has become a significant predictor of later health outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Journal of Agriculture and Food Research
                Journal of Agriculture and Food Research
                Elsevier BV
                26661543
                September 2023
                September 2023
                : 13
                : 100644
                Article
                10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100644
                3e03a256-c9ee-4925-b2a2-76d4a61cb234
                © 2023

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article