Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-08T23:16:36.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic variation in litter size and 12-day weight in mice and their relationships with post-weaning growth†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. P. Hanrahan  and
E. J. Eisen
J. P. Hanrahan
Affiliation:
Animal Science Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
E. J. Eisen
Affiliation:
Animal Science Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Get access

Summary

Data from a random-bred population of mice were used to examine the sources of variation in litter size and 12-day body weight, and, the genetic relationships between these traits and post-weaning body weights and body-weight gain from 3 to 6 weeks of age (post-weaning gain). The genetic model included maternal genetic effects in addition to the usual direct (individual) genetic effects. Such maternal genetic effects may be important to an understanding of traits like 12-day body weight of mice, where the young depend to a large extent on the mother for early postnatal nutrition.

Analysis of litter size yielded a paternal half-sib heritability estimate of 0·34±0·19, while twice the daughter-dam regression was 0·23 ± 0·08. The repeatability of litter size was 0·51±0·07. The correlation between direct genetic effects on litter size and those on 3-, 6-, and 8- week body weights and post-weaning gain were –0·18,0·36,0-34 and 0·58 respectively. The correlation between direct genetic effects on litter size and 12-day weight was positive (0·41), while the genetic correlation between maternal effects on 12-day weight and direct effects on litter size was negative (–0·37).

Analysis of 12-day weight showed that direct and maternal genetic effects were important sources of variation, but there was a large negative correlation (-0·88) between these effects. The usual genetic correlations between 12-day weight and post-weaning body weights were positive while post-weaning gain yielded a negative estimate. However, there appears to be a general negative correlation between direct genetic and maternal genetic effects in this population, for all such correlations were negative except that between direct effects on 12-day weight and maternal effects on post-weaning gain.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , August 1974 , pp. 13 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1974

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

Ahlschwede, W. T. and Robison, O. W. 1971. Maternal effects on weights and backfat of swine. J. Anim. Sci. 33: 1206–1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, N. 1966. Ovulational and post ovulational losses in strains of mice selected for large and small litters. Genet. Res. 7: 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, J. C. 1962. Recurrent selection. II. An experimental study with mice and Drosophila. Genet. Res. 3: 333–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradford, G. E. 1968. Selection for litter size in mice in the presence and absence of gonadotrophin treatment. Genetics, Princeton 58: 283–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmon, J. L. 1963. Heterosis, combining ability and maternal effects in mice. J. Genet. 58: 225–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ch'Ang, T. S. and Rae, A. L. 1972. The genetic basis of growth, reproduction and maternal environment in Romney ewes. II. Genetic covariation between hogget characters, fertility and maternal environment of the ewe. Aust. J. agric. Res. 23: 149–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. F., Legates, J. E. and Cockerham, C. C. 1959. Maternal influence on body weight. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 519–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisen, E. J. 1970. Maternal effects on litter size in mice. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 12: 241–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisen, E. J. and Hanrahan, J. P. 1974. Genetic drift and inbreeding depression measured from control populations of mice. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. (In press).Google Scholar
Eisen, E. J.Hanrahan, J. P. and Legates, J. E. 1973. Effects of population size and selection intensity on correlated responses to selection for postweaning gain in mice. Genetics, Princeton 74: 157–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eisen, E. J.Legates, J. E. and Robison, O. W. 1970. Selection for 12-day litter weight in mice. Genetics, Princeton 64: 511–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. 1955. Patterns of response in selection experiments with mice. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 20: 178–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. 1960a. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh and London.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1960b. The genetics of litter size in mice. J. cell. comp. Physiol. 56 (Suppl. 1): 153–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finn, C. A. 1964. Influence of the male on litter size in mice. J. Reprod. Fert. 7:107–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanrahan, J. P. and Eisen, E. J. 1973. Sexual dimorphism and direct and maternal genetic effects on body weight in mice. Theor. appl. Genet. 43: 39–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanrahan, J. P., Eisen, E. J. and Legates, J. E. 1973. The effects of population size and selection intensity on short-term response to selection for post-weaning gain in mice. Genetics, Princeton 73: 513–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, T. G. and Kennedy, J. P. 1972. Effects of age and parity on reproduction in young female mice. J. Reprod. Fert. 28: 77–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koch, R. M. and Clark, R. T. 1955. Genetic and environmental relationships among economic characters in beef cattle. III. Evaluating maternal environment. J. Anim. Sci. 14: 979–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, F. G., Harrington, F. E. and Hill, D. L. 1963. Effects of mating systems on ovulation, implantation and litter size in mice. Proc. Xlth Int. Cong. Genet, p. 155.Google Scholar
Miller, R. H., Legates, J. E. and Cockerham, C. C. 1963. Estimation of non-additive hereditary variance in traits of mice. Genetics, Princeton 48:177–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahnefeld, G. W., Comstock, R. E., Singh, U. and Napuket, S. R. 1966. Genetic correlation between growth rate and litter sizes in mice. Genetics, Princeton 54: 1423–1429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schilling, P., North, W. and Bogart, R. 1968. The effect of sire on litter size in mice. J.Hered. 59: 351–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willham, R. L. 1963. The covariance between relatives for characters composed of components contributed by related individuals. Biometrics 19: 18–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, C. W. and Legates, J. E. 1965. Genetic, phenotypic and maternal interrelationships of growth in mice. Genetics, Princeton 52: 563–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, C. W., Legates, J. E. and Farthing, B. R. 1965. Prenatal and postnatal influences on growth, prolificacy and maternal performance in mice. Genetics, Princeton 52: 553–561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed