Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T23:05:47.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Correlated changes in growth patterns and overall production efficiency following selection for testis size adjusted for body weight in young male lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

G. J. Lee ,
C. S. Haley  and
R. B. Land
G. J. Lee
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Edinburgh Research Station, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
C. S. Haley
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Edinburgh Research Station, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
R. B. Land
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Edinburgh Research Station, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
Get access

Abstract

Two divergent lines of sheep were produced by selection on an index of testis diameter adjusted for body weight at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age. There were correlated changes in growth patterns, such that animals in the high and low lines were of a similar weight at birth, but thereafter, the low line became progressively heavier than the high line. After 11 years of selection there was a 7-kg difference between the mean body weight of females in the two lines at 1·5 years of age and a 12-kg difference at 2·5 years. There was little evidence of any accompanying changes in body shape or in carcass composition. High-line females of all reproductive ages had a significantly higher fertility. High-line lambs had a significantly lower mortality and, at the end of selection, had an estimated probability of survival to 210 days of 0·25, 013 and 003 higher than in lambs from the low line, in lambs from 1-, 2- and 3-year-old dams respectively. The estimated number of lambs alive at 210 days per ewe mated was 0·30, 0·38 and 0·34 higher in the high line for ewes of 1, 2 and 3 years of age, but low-line lambs were 3 kg heavier on average at 210 days. The combined impact of improved ewe performance and changes in growth patterns led to a predicted greater production efficiency in the high line. It was estimated that, after 11 years of selection on the index of weight adjusted testis diameter, 0·62, 0·71 and 0·74 kg of high-line ewe at 1, 2 and 3 years of age, respectively, would be needed to produce the same weight of lamb at 210 days as 1 kg of low-line ewe. Improved ewe performance had a much larger impact on the changes in comparative efficiency than changes in growth patterns, but the contribution of the latter increased with age of ewe. Further experimental verification of the line differences in reproduction and lamb survival and study of their causes are needed. Nevertheless, these results indicate the promise of using indices of body weight and testis size to increase the efficiency of lamb production.

Keywords

growthreproductionselectionsheeptestes
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , June 1991 , pp. 477 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1991

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

REFERENCES

Atkins, K. D. 1984. The estimation of responses to selection in hill sheep. PhD. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. J. and Nelder, J. A. 1978. The GUM System. Numerical Algorithms Group, Oxford.Google Scholar
Brinks, J. S., Clark, R. T., Kieffer, N. M. and Urick, J. J. 1964. Estimation of genetic, environmental, and phenotypic parameters in range Hereford females. Journal of Animal Science 23: 711–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haley, C. S., Lee, G. J., Ritchie, M. and Land, R. B. 1990. Direct responses in males and correlated responses for reproduction in females to selection for testis size adjusted for body weight in young male lambs. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 89: 383–396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harvey, W. R. 1977. Users Guide to LSML76. Mixed models least square and maximum likelihood program. Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1980. Design in quantitative genetic selection experiments. In Selection Experiments in Laboratory and Domestic Animals (ed. Robertson, A.), pp. 1–13. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G., Marks, P. J., Jenkins, J. C. and Land, R. B. 1990. Selection on testis size as an indicator of maturity in growing animals. 1. Direct and correlated responses in growth. Genetique Selection et Evolution 22: 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, R. B. 1973. The expression of female sex limited characters in the male. Nature, London 241: 208–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, G. J. and Land, R. B. 1985. Testis size and LH response to LH-RH as male criteria of female reproductive performance. In Genetics of Reproduction in Sheep (ed. Land, R. B. and Robinson, D. W.), pp. 332–342. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. C. and Doolittle, D. P. 1977. Effects of selection for independent changes in two highly correlated body weight traits of mice. Genetical Research 29: 133–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNeilly, J. R., Fordyce, M., Land, R. B., Lee, G. J. and Webb, R. 1986. Endocrine differences in rams after genetic selection for testis size. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 76: 131–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mafizul Islam, A. B. M., Hill, W. G. and Land, R. B. 1976. Ovulation rates of lines of mice selected for testis weight. Genetical Research 27: 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quaas, R. L. 1976. Computing the diagonal elements and inverse of a large numerator relationship matrix. Biometrics 32: 949–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royer, P. 1974. Growth and development of bony tissue. In Scientific Foundations of Pediatrics (ed. Davis, J. A. and Dobbing, J.), pp. 376–398. Heineman, London.Google Scholar
Schinckel, A., Johnson, R. K., Pumphrey, R. A. and Zimmerman, D. R. 1983. Testicular growth in boars of different genetic lines and its relationship to reproductive performance. Journal of Animal Science 56: 1065–1076.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Short, R. F. 1980. The hormonal control of growth at puberty. In Growth in Animals (ed. Lawrence, T. L. J.), pp. 25–45. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. and Craig, J. 1965. Genetic correlation during growth of twin cattle. Animal Production 7: 83–102.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. and Juga, J. 1989. Cumulative selection differentials and realized heritabilities. Animal Production 49: 203–208.Google Scholar
Trueta, J. 1974. Growth and development of bones and joints — Orthopaedic aspects. In Scientific Foundations of Pediatrics (ed. Davis, J. A. and Dobbing, J.), pp. 399–419. Heineman, London.Google Scholar
Webster, A. J. F. 1989. Bioenergetics, bioengineering and growth. Animal Production 48: 249–269.Google Scholar
Wiener, G. 1967. A comparison of the body size, fleece weight and maternal performance of five breeds of sheep kept in one environment. Animal Production 9: 177–195.Google Scholar
Wiener, G. and Hayter, S. 1974. Body size and conformation in sheep from birth to maturity as affected by breed, crossbreeding, maternal and other factors. Animal Production 19: 47–65.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. P. 1973. Selection for a ratio of body weight gains in mice. Journal of Animal Science 37: 1098–1103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed