Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-xq9c7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-18T22:04:15.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential rates of genetic change and genotype × environment interactions in six pig breeding company populations and a purebred Large White population

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. G. Evans ,
A. J. Kempster  and
D. E. Steane
D. G. Evans
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, PO Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes MK2 2EF
A. J. Kempster
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, PO Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes MK2 2EF
D. E. Steane
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, PO Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes MK2 2EF
Get access

Abstract

Differential rates of genetic change in litter productivity, growth and carcass traits were estimated for the pig populations of six British breeding companies from their relative performance between 1972 and 1981 in the Meat and Livestock Commission's Commercial Pig Evaluation. Pigs were grown on one of two feeding regimens and slaughtered at one of three live weights (61, 93 and 118 kg).

Important differentials were found for a number of traits. Annual rates of change in litter size at birth differed by 0·34 pigs between the two extreme populations. The range between populations for live-weight daily gain (ad libitum feeding) was 20 g, for lean weight daily gain (restricted feeding) it was 6 g, and for lean weight food conversion (feeding regimens pooled) it was 28 g food per g gain. The average annual rate of change of the six company populations was compared with the rate achieved by the purebred Large White breed over the period 1972 to 1977. For mean piglet birth weight the rate was 30 g higher for the company populations, whilst for carcass weight daily gain it was 24 g higher.

There was little evidence for population × feeding regimen interactions except that companies ranked differently in average daily food intake, live-weight daily gain and carcass weight daily gain on the two feeding regimens. On limited evidence, population × slaughter weight interactions were also unimportant.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , December 1988 , pp. 457 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

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

Evans, D. G. and Kempster, A. J. 1979. A comparison of different predictors of the lean content of pig carcasses. 2. Predictors for use in population studies and experiments. Animal Production 28: 97–108.Google Scholar
Evans, D. G. and Kempster, A. J. 1982. A multivariate study of pig carcass growth and composition. 1. Production and grading characteristics. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 99: 499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J. 1974. Genotype × environment interactions in pigs. Proceedings of World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Madrid. Vol. 1, Plenary Sessions, pp. 873–884.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Evans, D. G. and Chadwick, J. P. 1984. The effects of source population, feeding regimen, sex and day of slaughter on the muscle quality characteristics of British crossbred pigs. Animal Production 39: 455–464.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1980. Commercial Pig Evaluation, Management and Procedures. MLC. Bletchley.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1982. Commercial Pig Evaluation, Eighth Annual Report. MLC. Bletchley.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G., Smith, C., Makower, M. and Bird, P. J. W. N. 1982. An economic appraisal of pig improvement in Great Britain. 1. Genetic and production aspects. Animal Production 35: 215–224.Google Scholar
Pym, R. A. E. 1982. Selection for efficiency of food utilisation in livestock and poultry. Proceedings of 2nd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Madrid. Vol. 5, Plenary Sessions, pp. 231–244.Google Scholar
Searle, S. R. 1971. Linear Models. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar