Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:38:34.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth, fertility, prolificacy and fleece weight of Romanov, Finnsheep and Booroola purebreds and their first cross and backcross with the DLS breed

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. H. Fahmy
M. H. Fahmy
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, Dairy and Swine Research and Development Centre, Lennoxville, Québec, Canada, J1M 1Z3
Get access

Abstract

Records ivere collected on Romanov (R), Finnsheep (F), and Booroola Merino (B); first cross; and backcrosses of these breeds with a new synthetic breed of Dorset, Leicester and Suffolk (DLS). The data covered the period from the birth of ewes to weaning of their progeny. The heaviest lambs at birth were the B backcross and R first and backcrosses (4·1 to 4·0 kg) and the lightest were pure R (3·0 kg). The fastest pre-weaning average daily gain was that ofR crosses. R purebreds were more fertile (109%, P < 0·01) than F (81%) and B (62%). They were also more prolific at birth and at weaning (2·44, 2·13) than F (2·04, 1·71, P < 0·01) and B (2·36, 2·09, P > 0·05) purebreds, respectively. Similarly, first-cross R ewes were more prolific than first-crosses of F and B (1·99 v. 2·86 and 1·70), also backcross R ewes were more prolific than backcrosses ofF and B (1·63 v. 1·45 and 1·42, P > 0·05), respectively. R first-cross ewes had heavier litters (6·31 and 26·1 kg) than B (5·17 and 20·3 kg, P>0·01) and F (5·52 and 24·4 kg) at birth and at day 50. The lambs born to DLS ewes were the heaviest at birth and at day 50 compared with those from prolific ewes. Fleece weight in B and its crosses was significantly higher than in R. Crosses showed generally positive heterotic effect in weights, prolificacy and wool production compared with pure breeds. In two data sets, additive direct effect ofR was higher than that ofF at birth (by 0·11 and 0·10 kg) and at day 50 (by 0·57 and 0 kg) but was similar at day 100 and day 365. The additive direct effect of both R and F was non-significantly different to that of B at birth in both data sets, but in only one data set was it higher (P < 0·001) at day 50 (by 2·29 and 1·72 kg), at day 100 (by 5·24 and 5·30 kg) and at day 365 (by 8·7 and 8·4 kg, respectively). Maternal direct effects ofR was higher (P < 0·05) than F in lamb weights at day 1 and 50, and higher than B in lamb weight at day 50. Individual heterosis between both R and F and DLS were -3·7 and -3·6% in weight at birth, 1·46 and 2·09% in weight at day 50 respectively. The corresponding maternal heterosis were, -2·9, -5·2, 1·46 and -0·02%.

Keywords

growthheterosisreproductionsheepwool
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 3 , June 1996 , pp. 479 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Boujenane, I. and Bradford, G. E. 1991. Genetic effects on ewe productivity of crossing D'man and Sardi breeds of sheep, journal of Animal Science 69:525–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boujenane, I., Bradford, G. E., Berger, Y. M. and Chikhi, A. 1991a. Genetic and environmental effects on growth to 1 year and viability of lambs from a crossbreeding study of D'man and Sardi breeds, journal of Animal Science 69:3989–3998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boujenane, I., Bradford, G. E. and Famula, T. R. 1991b. Inheritance of litter size and its components in crosses between the D'man and Sardi breeds of sheep. Journal of Animal Science 69:517–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burditt, L. G., Zavy, M. T. and Buchanan, D. S. 1988. Litter size, birth weight and weaning weight in Dorset, Finnish Landrace or Booroola Merino sired lambs. Animal Science Research Report, MP-125, pp.14–15. Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar
Fahmy, M. H. 1988a. Development of DLS sheep: lamb production of the pure breeds, initial crosses and first generation DLS. World Revieiv of Animal Production 24 (3):77–82.Google Scholar
Fahmy, M. H. 1988b. The accumulative effect of Finnsheep breeding in crossbreeding schemes, journal of Agricultural Science in Finland 60:481–491.Google Scholar
Fahmy, M. H. 1989. Reproductive performance, growth and wool production of Romanov sheep in Canada. Small Ruminant Research 2:253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, M. H. 1990. Development of DLS breed of sheep: genetic and phenotypic parameters of date of lambing and litter size. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 70:771–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, M. H., Boucher, J. M., Poste, L. M., Gregoire, R., Bultler, G. and Comeau, J. E. 1992. Feed efficiency, carcass characteristics, and sensory quality of lambs, with or without prolific ancestry, fed diets with different protein supplements. Journal of Animal Science 70:1365–1374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gabirta, D. and Vails Ortiz, M. 1985. Improvement of reproductive performances in Rasa Aragonesa. Present results in selection and crossbreeding experiments. In Genetics of Reproduction in Sheep (ed. Land, R. B and Robinson, D.), pp.107–109. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Goot, H., Eyal, E., Folman, Y. and Foote, W. C. 1979. Contemporary comparisons between progeny by Finnish Landrace and Romanov rams out of Mutton Merino and Awassi Ewes. Livestock Production Science 6:283–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakubec, V. and Krizek, J. 1988. Breeding and exploitation of prolific breeds in Czechoslovakia. journal of Agricultural Science in Finland 60:505–510.Google Scholar
McGuirk, B. J., Killeen, I. D., Piper, L. R., Bindon, B. M., Wilson, R., Caffery, G. and Langford, C. 1984. Lamb production from Booroola × Collinsville ewes. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 15:464–467.Google Scholar
Ricordeau, G., Tchamitchian, L., Thimonier, J., Flamant, J. C. and Theriez, M. 1978. First survey of results obtained in France on reproductive and maternal performance in sheep, with particular reference to the Romanov breed and crosses with it. Livestock Production Science 5:181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. SAS user's guide, statistics (5th ed.). SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
ails Ortiz, M. 1988. Finnsheep and Romanov comparative performances obtained under the same management conditions in Spain. journal of Agricultural Science in Finland 60:553 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Vesely, J. A. and Swierstra, E. E. 1987. Reproductive traits of ewe lambs representing eight genetic types born in winter, spring, summer and fall. journal of Animal Science 65:1195–1200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willingham, T., Shelton, M. and Lupton, C. 1988. The influence of introducing the Booroola Merino genotype to Rambouillet flocks on reproduction and fleece traits in comparison with other selected breed crosses. SID Research journal 6 (3):1–5.Google Scholar
Young, L. D. and Dickerson, G. E. 1991. Comparison of Booroola Merino and Finnsheep: effects on productivity of mates and performance of crossbred lambs, journal of Animal Science 69:1899–1911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed