Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T15:36:14.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic variation in measures of food efficiency in pigs and their genetic relationships with growth rate and backfat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. A. Mrode  and
B. W. Kennedy
R. A. Mrode
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 Canada
B. W. Kennedy
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 Canada
Get access

Abstract

Data on 3783 Yorkshire, 2842 Landrace and 937 Duroc littermate pairs of boars, station tested between 1976 and 1989, were used to measure genetic parameters of average daily gain (ADG) from 30 to 90 kg, live backfat at 90 kg (BF), estimated lean growth rate (LGR), average daily food intake, food conversion ratio (FCR) and lean food conversion ratio (LFCR), as well as measures of residual daily food intakes over and above requirements for growth and lean growth. A method was developed to obtain restricted maximum likelihood estimates of genetic variances and covariances under an animal model when observations are on the means of sib pairs. Heritabilities of ADG, BF, LGR, FCR and LFCR were 0·43, 0·59, 0·39, 0·28 and 0·34, respectively. Heritability of daily food intake was 0·45, and heritability of measures of residual daily food intake ranged from 0·30 to 0·38. About half of the variation in daily food intake was residual (0·48 to 0·56). Genetic correlations of ADG with daily food intake, FCR and LFCR were 0·80, −0·28 and −0·09, respectively, and were small and positive (0·18 to 0·34) with measures of residual daily food intake. Backfat had genetic correlations of 0·42, 0·24 and 0·52 with daily food intake, FCR and LFCR, respectively, and genetic correlations between backfat and measures of residual daily food intake ranged from 0·15 to 0·61. Selection against residual food intake may be a useful means of improving efficiency of food utilization.

Keywords

backfatfood conversion efficiencygenetic correlationgrowth rateheritability.
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , April 1993 , pp. 225 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1993

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

Cameron, N. D., Pearson, M., Richardson, B. and Brade, H. 1990. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for performance traits in pigs with ad libitum and restricted feeding. Proceedings of the fourth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 15, pp. 473–476.Google Scholar
Diestre, A. and Kempster, A. J. 1985. The estimation of pig carcass composition from different measurements with special reference to classification and grading. Animal Production 41: 383–391.Google Scholar
Foster, W. H., Kilpatrick, D. J. and Heaney, I. H. 1983. Genetic variation in the efficiency of energy utilization by the fattening pig. Animal Production 37: 387–393.Google Scholar
Fowler, V. R., Bichard, M. and Pease, A. 1976. Objectives in pig breeding. Animal Production 23: 365–387.Google Scholar
Gunsett, F. C. 1986. Problems associated with selection for traits defined as a ratio of two component traits. Proceedings of the third world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 11, pp. 437–442.Google Scholar
Haer, L. C. M. de. 1992. Relevance of eating pattern for selection of growing pigs. Ph.D. thesis, Research Institute for Animal Production (IVO-DLO) Schoonoord, Zeist, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R. 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
Hutchens, L. K. and Hintz, R. L. 1981. A summary of genetic and phenotypic statistics for pubertal and growth characteristics in swine. Technical bulletin, Oklahoma State University, T-155.Google Scholar
Iwaisaki, H. 1989. Distributional and genetic properties of and selection for ratio indexes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
Kennedy, B. W. 1984. Breeding for feed efficiency: swine and dairy cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 64: 505–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, B. W., Hudson, G. F. S. and Schaeffer, L. R. 1986. Evaluation of genetic change in performance tested pigs in Canada. Proceedings of the third world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 10, pp. 149–154.Google Scholar
Kennedy, B. W., Johansson, K. and Hudson, G. F. S. 1985. Heritabilities and genetic correlations for backfat and growth rate in performance tested pigs. Journal of Animal Science 61: 78–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korver, S. 1988. Genetic aspects of feed intake and feed efficiency in dairy cattle: a review. Livestock Production Science 20: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovac, M. and Groeneveld, E. 1990. Multivariate genetic evaluation in swine combining data from different testing schemes. Journal of Animal Science 68: 3507–3522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luiting, P. 1990. Genetic variation of energy partitioning in laying hens: causes of variation in residual feed consumption. World's Poultry Science Journal 46: 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luiting, P., Meidertsma, S. and Urff, E. M. 1991. Genetic trends (animal model — REML) in a selection experiment for residual feed consumption. Proceedings of the forty second annual meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, p. 233 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Meyer, K. 1989. Restricted maximum likelihood to estimate variance components for animal models with several random effects using a derivative-free algorithm. Genetique Selection Evolution 21: 317–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ollivier, L. 1986. Results of a long-term selection experiment for lean tissue growth in the pig. Proceedings of the third world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 12, pp. 168–175.Google Scholar
Ollivier, L., Gueblez, R., Webb, A. J. and Van der Steen, H. A. M. 1990. Breeding goals for nationally and internationally operating pig breeding organizations. Proceedings of the fourth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 15, pp. 383–394.Google Scholar
Rae, W., Jones, S. D. M. and Kennedy, B. W. 1985. Pork carcass grading: the magnitude of breed and sex biases in the prediction of meat yield from a single fat measurement. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 65: 619–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sather, A. P. 1990. A preliminary report to the CSIP Genetics Technical Committee on the prediction of lean yield in pigs from live animal appraisal. Mimeo report, Agriculture Canada, Lacombe, Alberta.Google Scholar
Sather, A. P. and Fredeen, H. T. 1978. Effect of selection for lean growth rate upon feed utilization by the market hog. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 58: 285–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W. C., Ellis, M., Chadwick, J. P. and Laird, R. 1991. The influence of index selection for improved growth and carcass characteristics on appetite in a population of Large White pigs. Animal Production 52: 193–199.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. 1979. Sire evaluation. Biometrics 35: 339–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, A. J. 1989. Genetics of food intake in the pig. In The voluntary food intake of pigs, British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 13, pp. 41–50.Google Scholar
Webb, A. J. and King, J. W. B. 1983. Selection for improved food conversion ratio on ad libitum group feeding in pigs. Animal Production 37: 375–385.Google Scholar