Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T11:32:24.368Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Marker-assisted selection in an outbred poultry breeding nucleus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. van der Beck  and
J. A. M. van Arendonk
S. van der Beck
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Institute of Animal Sciences, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. A. M. van Arendonk
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Institute of Animal Sciences, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

The value of using a marker for a quantitative trait locus (QTL) affecting a sex-limited trait in an outbred poultry breeding nucleus was studied. Marker and QTL were in linkage equilibrium in the base population. The recombination rate between marker and QTL was 0-05. A closed nucleus with 9000 chickens per generation was deterministically simulated. The genetic model contained polygenes and a QTL linked to a marker. Genetic effects explained proportionately 0·3 of the phenotypic variance before selection. Under selection, polygenic variance reached an equilibrium and QTL variance decreased continuously over time. Cocks were selected in two steps. First the best cocks of each full-sib family were selected (within-family selection) while final selection took place after information on fiill-sibs was available. Hens were selected after they had completed production. The effect of using marker information in estimating breeding values was studied in an ongoing breeding programme. Transmission of marker alleles was always traceable. Cumulative response over five generations increased proportionately by 0·06 to 0·13 if a marker linked to a QTL that explained 0·2 of the genetic variance was used. Cumulative response increased up to 0·28 if the QTL explained 0-8 of the genetic variance. Additional response due to the use of a marker increased with increasing intensity of within-family selection of cocks, increased with increasing variance explained by the QTL and was higher if within-family selection of cocks was carried out after rather than before their sibs had complete records.

Keywords

genetic markersgenetic modelspoultryselection responses
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , February 1996 , pp. 171 - 180
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

Biswas, S. 1991. Topics in statistical methodology. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Burrows, P. M. 1972. Expected selection differentials for directional selection. Biometrics 28:1091–1100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cochran, W. G. 1951. Improvements by means of selection. Proceedings of the second Berkeley symposium on mathematics, statistics and probability (ed. Neyman, J.), pp. 449–470.Google Scholar
Dentine, M. R. 1992. Marker-assisted selection in cattle. Animal Biotechnology 3: 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducrocq, V. and Quaas, R. L. 1988. Prediction of genetic response to truncation selection across generations. Journal of Dairy Science 71: 2543–2553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernando, R. L. and Grossman, M. 1989. Marker assisted selection using best linear unbiased prediction. Genetics Selection Evolution 21: 467–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groen, A. F., Crooijmans, R. P. M. A., Kampen, A. J. A. van, Beek, S. van der, Poel, J. J. van der and Groenen, M. A. M. 1994. Microsatellite polymorphism in commercial broiler and layer lines. Proceedings of the fifth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 21, pp. 94–97.Google Scholar
Kashi, Y., Hallerman, E. and Soller, M. 1990. Marker-assisted selection of candidate bulls for progeny testing programmes. Animal Production 51: 63–74.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E. and Arendonk, J. A. M. van. 1992. Potential improvements in rate of genetic gain from marker-assisted selection in dairy cattle breeding schemes. Journal of Dairy Science 75: 1651–1659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, C. 1967. Improvement of metric traits through specific genetic loci. Animal Production 9: 349–358.Google Scholar
Smith, C. and Simpson, S. P. 1986. The use of genetic polymorphisms in livestock improvement. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 103: 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soller, M. 1978. The use of loci associated with quantitative traits in dairy cattle improvement. Animal Production 27: 133–139.Google Scholar
Soller, M. 1994. Marker assisted selection — an overview. Animal Biotechnology 5:193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soller, M. and Beckmann, J. S. 1983. Genetic polymorphism in varietal identification and genetic improvement. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 67: 25–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stam, P. 1986. The use of marker loci in selection for quantitative characters. In Exploiting New Technologies in Livestock Improvement: Animal Breeding (ed. Smith, C., King, J. W. B. and McKay, J.), pp. 170–182. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar