Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:07:27.826Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of a loin muscling quantitative trait locus (LoinMAX™) on carcass and VIA-based traits in crossbred lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

A. Y. Masri ,
N. R. Lambe ,
J. M. Macfarlane ,
S. Brotherstone ,
W. Haresign ,
E. Rius-Vilarrasa  and
L. Bünger
A. Y. Masri*
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
N. R. Lambe
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
J. M. Macfarlane
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
S. Brotherstone
Affiliation:
Ashworth Laboratories, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
W. Haresign
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Llanbadarn Campus, Aberystwyth, SY23 3AL, UK
E. Rius-Vilarrasa
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
L. Bünger
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
*
†E-mail: amer.masri@sac.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

LoinMAX (LM) is a quantitative trait locus (QTL), which was found to be segregated in Australian Poll Dorset sheep, and maps to the distal end of sheep chromosome 18. LM-QTL was reported to increase Musculus longissimus dorsi area and weight by 11% and 8%, respectively. The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the direct effects of LM-QTL in a genetic background typical of the stratified structure of the UK sheep industry, before it can be recommended for use in the United Kingdom. Crossbred lambs, either non-carriers or carrying a single copy of LM-QTL, were produced out of Scottish Mule ewes (Bluefaced Leicester × Scottish Blackface) artificially inseminated with semen from two Poll Dorset rams that were heterozygous for LM-QTL. Unexpectedly, one of these rams was also heterozygous for a QTL that affects the overall carcass muscling (MyoMAX™). This was accounted for by nesting MyoMAX™ status (carrier or non-carrier) within sire in the statistical analysis. Lambs were weighed and scanned by using X-ray computed tomography (CT) at an average age of 113 days. Ultrasound scan measurements, along with lamb weights, were taken at an average age of 140 days and lambs were then slaughtered. Carcasses were weighed and classified for fat cover and conformation scores, based on the Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) carcass classification scheme, and then scanned by using a video image analysis (VIA) system. M. longissimus lumborum (MLL) width, as measured by CT scanning, was greater (P < 0.05) in lambs heterozygous for LM-QTL compared with non-carriers. MLL in LM-QTL carrier lambs was also significantly deeper, as measured by both ultrasound muscle depth at the third lumbar vertebrae (+3.7%; P < 0.05) and CT scanning at the fifth lumbar vertebrae (+3.4%; P < 0.01). Consequently, MLL area, was measured by using CT scanning, was significantly higher (+4.5%; P < 0.01) in lambs carrying a single copy of LM-QTL compared with non-carriers. Additional traits measured by CT, such as leg muscle dimensions, average muscle density and tissue proportions, were not significantly affected by LM-QTL. LM-QTL did not significantly affect total carcass lean or fat weights or MLC conformation and fat score classifications. Using previously derived algorithms, VIA could detect a significant effect of the LM-QTL on the predicted weight of saleable meat yield in the loin primal cut (+2.2%; P < 0.05), but not in the other primal cuts, or the total carcass.

Keywords

LoinMAX™ QTL, crossbred lambs, muscling, computer tomography, video image analysis
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , March 2010 , pp. 407 - 416
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

Allen, P 2005. Evaluation of video image analysis systems for beef carcass classification. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Langford Food Industry Conference. 9–11 PP. University of Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Anderson, J 2003. Planned carcase production. Sheep Management Matters – A Series on Sheep Management Topics from the Meat and Livestock Commission 8, 1–16.Google Scholar
Banks, R 1997. The Meat Elite Project: Establishment and Achievements of an Elite Meat Sheep Nucleus. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 12, 598–601.Google Scholar
Broad, TE, Glass, BC, Greer, GJ, Robertson, TM, Bain, WE, Lord, EA, McEwan, JC, Peterson, SW 2000. Search for a locus near to myostatin that increase muscling in Texel sheep in New Zealand. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 60, 100–112.Google Scholar
Campbell, AW, McLaren, RJ 2007. LoinMaxTM™ and MyoMAX™: taking DNA marker tests from the research environment to commercial reality. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 67, 160–162.Google Scholar
Campbell, AW, Waldron, DF 2006. Genetic improvement of meat production in small ruminants. In Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock Production, PP. 04–06. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.Google Scholar
Clop, A, Marq, F, Takeda, H, Pirottin, D, Tordoir, X, Bibe, B, Bouix, J, Caiment, F, Elsen, JM, Eychenne, F, Larzul, C, Laville, E, Meish, F, Milenkovic, D, Tobin, J, Charlier, C, Georges, M 2006. A mutation creating a potential illegitimate microRNA target site in the myostatin gene affects muscularity in sheep. Nature Genetics 38, 813–818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockett, NE, Jackson, SP, Shay, TL, Farnir, F, Berghmans, S, Snowder, GD, Nielsen, DM, Georges, M 1996. Polar overdominance at the ovine callipyge locus. Science 273, 236–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockett, NE, Jackson, SP, Shay, TL, Nielsen, D, Moore, SS, Steele, MR, Barendse, W, Green, RD, Georges, M 1994. Chromosomal localization of the callipyge gene in sheep (Ovis aries) using bovine DNA markers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91, 3019–3023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dekkers, JCM 2004. Commercial application of marker- and gene-assisted selection in livestock: Strategies and lessons. Journal of Animal Science 82, 313–328.Google ScholarPubMed
Dekkers, JCM, Hospital, F 2002. The use of molecular genetics in the improvement of agricultural populations. Nature Reviews Genetics 3, 22–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodds, KG, McEwan, JC, Davis, GH 2007. Integration of molecular and quantitative information in sheep and goat industry breeding programmes. Small Ruminant Research 70, 32–41.Google Scholar
Duckett, SK, Snowder, GD, Cockett, NE 2000. Effect of the callipyge gene on muscle growth, calpastatin activity, and tenderness of three muscles across the growth curve. Journal of Animal Science 78, 2836–2841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellis, M, Webster, GM, Merrell, BG, Brown, I 1997. The influence of terminal sire breed on carcass composition and eating quality of crossbred lambs. Animal Science 64, 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freking, BA, Murphy, SK, Wylie, AA, Rhodes, SJ, Keele, JW, Leymaster, KA, Jirtle, RL, Smith, TP 2002. Identification of the single base change causing the callipyge muscle hypertrophy phenotype, the only known example of polar overdominance in mammals. Genome Research 12, 1496–1506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gao, Y, Zhang, R, Hu, X, Li, N 2007. Application of genomic technologies to the improvement of meat quality of farm animals. Meat Science 77, 36–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadjipavlou, G, Matika, O, Clop, A, Bishop, SC 2008. Two single nucleotide polymorphisms in the myostatin (GDF8) gene have significant association with muscle depth of commercial Charollais sheep. Animal Genetics 39, 346–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkins, DL 1996. The relationship between muscularity, muscle: bone ratio and cut dimensions in male and female lamb carcasses and the measurement of muscularity using image analysis. Meat Science 44, 307–317.Google ScholarPubMed
Jones, HE, Lewis, RM, Young, MJ, Wolf, BT 2002. The use of X-ray computer tomography for measuring the muscularity of live sheep. Animal Science 75, 387–399.Google Scholar
Jopson, NB, Nicoll, GB, Stevenson-Barry, JM, Duncan, S, Greer, GJ, Bain, WE, Gerard, EM, Glass, BC, Broad, TE, McEwan, JC 2001. Mode of inheritance and effects on meat quality of the rib-eye muscling (REM) QTL in sheep. Proceedings of the Association for the Advancement of Animal Breeding and Genetics 14, 111–114.Google Scholar
Karamichou, E, Richardson, RI, Nute, GR, McLean, KA, Bishop, SC 2006. A partial genome scan to map quantitative trait loci for carcass composition, as assessed by X-ray computer tomography, and meat quality traits in Scottish Blackface Sheep. Animal Science 82, 301–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, AJ, Cook, GL, Grantley-Smith, M 1986. National estimates of the body composition of British cattle, sheep and pigs with special reference to trends in fatness. A review. Meat Science 17, 107–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kijas, JW, McCulloch, R, Hocking Edwards, JE, Oddy, VH, Lee, SH, van der Werf, J 2007. Evidence of multiple alleles effecting muscling and fatness at the Ovine GDF8 locus. BMC Genetics 8, 80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koohmaraie, M, Shackelford, S, Wheeler, T, Lonergan, S, Doumit, M 1995. A muscle hypertrophy condition in lamb (callipyge): characterization of effects on muscle growth and meat quality traits. Journal of Animal Science 73, 3596–3607.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambe, NR, Macfarlane, JM, Masri, A, Matika, O, Haresign, W, Bünger, L 2009. The effects of three muscling quantitative trait loci on growth patterns of crossbred lambs. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, Abstract 40.Google Scholar
Laville, E, Bouix, J, Sayd, T, Bibe, B, Elsen, JM, Larzul, C 2004. Effects of a quantitative locus for muscle hypertrophy from Belgian Texel sheep on carcass conformation and muscularity. Journal of Animal Science 82, 3128–3137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, RM, Haresign, W, Davies, MH, Roehe, R, Bünger, L, Simm, G 2006. The role of sire referencing schemes in terminal sire sheep to improve the carcass quality of crossbred lambs: final report. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, London, England.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, JM, Lambe, NR, Bishop, SC, Matika, O, Rius-Vilarrasa, E, McLean, KA, Haresign, W, Wolf, BT, McLaren, RJ, Bünger, L 2009. Effect of the Texel muscling quantitative trait locus on carcass traits in crossbred lambs. Animal 3, 189–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macfarlane, JM, Lewis, RM, Emmans, GC, Young, MJ, Simm, G 2006. Predicting carcass composition of terminal sire sheep using X-ray computed tomography. Animal Science 82, 289–300.Google Scholar
Mann, AD, Young, MJ, Glasbey, CA, McLean, KA 2003. STAR: Sheep Tomogram Analysis Routines (V.3.4) BioSS Software Documentation.Google Scholar
Marcq, C, Larzul, C, Marot, V, Bouix, J, Eychenne, F, Laville, E, Bibe, B, Leroy, PL, Georges, M, Elsen, JM 2002. Preliminary results of a whole-genome scan targeting QTL for carcass traits in Texel × Romanov intercross. Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock Production, comm. no. 02-14. Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
Matika, O, Pong-Wong, R, Woolliams, JA, Low, J, Nieuwhof, GJ, Boon, S, Bishop, SC 2006. Verifying trait loci for muscle depth in commercial terminal sire sheep. Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock Production, comm. no. 22-10.Google Scholar
McClelland, TH, Bonaiti, B, Taylor, SCS 1976. Breed differences in body composition of equally mature sheep. Animal Production 23, 281–293.Google Scholar
McEwan, JC, Broad, TE, Jopson, NB, Robertson, TM, Glass, BC, Burkin, HB, Gerard, EM, Lord, EA, Greer, GJ, Bain, WE, Nicoll, GB 2000. Rib-eye muscling (REM) locus in sheep: phenotypic effects and comparative genome localization. Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Society of Animal Genetics, Poster Bo11. Minneapolis, MN, USA.Google Scholar
McEwan, JC, Gerard, EM, Jopson, NB, Nicoll, GB, Greer, GJ, Dodds, KG, Bain, WE, Burkin, HR, Lord, EA, Broad, TE 1998. Localization of a QTL for rib-eye muscling on OAR18. Animal Genetics 29 (suppl. 1), 66.Google Scholar
McLaren, RJ, Broad, TE, McEwan, JC, Jopson, NB, Robertson, TR, Glass, BC, Gerard, EM, Greer, GJ, Bain, WE, Nicoll, GB 2001. Identification of positional candidates for the Carwell locus for rib-eye muscling in sheep. Proceedings of Plant and Animal Genome IX W46, 13–17.Google Scholar
McLaren, RJ, McEwan, JC, For, R, Glass, BC, Broad, TE, Greer, GJ, Nicoll, GB 2003. Recombination breakpoint mapping of the Carwell locus for Rib-eye muscling in sheep. International Congress of Genetics XIX. Poster abstract 01064.Google Scholar
Navajas, EA, Glasbey, CA, McLean, KA, Fisher, AV, Charteris, AJL, Lambe, NR, Bünger, L 2006. In vivo measurements of muscle volume by automatic image analysis of spiral computed tomography scans. Animal Science 82, 545–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Navajas, EA, Lambe, NR, McLean, KA, Glasbey, CA, Fisher, AV, Charteris, AJL, Bünger, L, Simm, G 2007. Accuracy of in vivo muscularity indices measured by computer tomography and their association with carcass quality in lambs. Meat Science 75, 533–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicoll, GB, Burkin, HR, Broad, TE, Jopson, NB, Greer, GJ, Bain, WE, Wright, CS, Dodds, KG, Fennessy, PF, McEwan, JC 1998. Genetic linkage in microsatellite markers to the Carwell locus for rib-eye muscling in sheep. Proceedings the 6th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, contribution 26-529. Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Pollott, G, Stone, D 2006. The breeding structure of the British sheep industry 2003 (ed. R.D. Eglin, A. Ortiz Pelaez and C.J Cook) Defra, London (http://www.defra.gov.uk).Google Scholar
Rasch, D, Herrendörfer, G, Bock, J, Busch, K 1978. Verfahrensbiliothek Versuchsplanung und –auswertung –Band1. VEB Deutscher Landwirtschaftsverlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Rius-Vilarrasa, E, Bünger, L, Maltin, C, Matthews, KR, Roehe, R 2009a. Evaluation of Video Image Analysis (VIA) technology to predict meat yield of sheep carcasses on-line under UK conditions. Meat Science 82, 94–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rius-Vilarrasa, E, Roehe, R, Macfarlane, JM, Lambe, NR, Matthews, KR, Haresign, W, Bünger, L 2009b. Effects of a quantitative trait locus for increased muscularity on carcass traits measured by EUROP scores and Video Image Analysis in crossbred lambs. In press.Google Scholar
Safari, E, Fogarty, NM, Gilmour, AR 2005. A review of genetic parameter estimates for wool, growth, meat and reproduction traits in sheep. Livestock Production Science 92, 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Werf, JHJ 2007. Marker-assisted selection in sheep and goats. FAO Corporate Document Repository 13, 230–247.Google Scholar
Walling, GA, Visscher, PM, Simm, G, Bishop, SC 2001. Confirmed linkage for QTLs affecting muscling in Texel sheep on chromosome 2 and 18. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, pp. 5–6. Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
Walling, GA, Visscher, PM, Wilson, AD, McTeir, BL, Simm, G, Bishop, SC 2004. Mapping of quantitative trait loci for growth and carcass traits in commercial sheep population. Journal of Animal Science 82, 2234–2245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, T, Wu, XY, Juengel, JL 2001. Highly prolific Booroola sheep have a mutation in the intracellular kinase domain of bone morphogenetic protein IB receptor (ALK-6) that is expressed in both oocytes and granulosa cells. Biology of Reproduction 64, 1225–1235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, MJ, Garden, KL, Knopp, TC 1987. Computer aided tomography- comprehensive body composition data from live animals. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 47, 69–71.Google Scholar
Young, MJ, Nsoso, SJ, Logan, CM, Beatson, PR 1996. Prediction of carcass tissue weight in vivo using live weight, ultrasound or X-ray CT measurements. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 56, 205–211.Google Scholar
Young, MJ, Simm, G, Glasbey, CA 2001. Computerized tomography for carcass analysis. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science 62, 255–263.Google Scholar