Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T03:55:33.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Correlated responses on growth traits after two-stage selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 June 2019

R. Peiró ,
A. Y. Badawy ,
A. Blasco  and
M. A. Santacreu Open the ORCID record for M. A. Santacreu [Opens in a new window]
R. Peiró
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Animal, Universitat Politècnica de València, P.O. Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain
A. Y. Badawy
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Animal, Universitat Politècnica de València, P.O. Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain
A. Blasco
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Animal, Universitat Politècnica de València, P.O. Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain
M. A. Santacreu*
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Animal, Universitat Politècnica de València, P.O. Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain
*
†E-mail: msantacr@dca.upv.es
Get access

Abstract

Rabbit commercial maternal lines are usually selected for litter size (LS) and paternal lines for growth rate (GR). Line OR_LS was selected by ovulation rate (OR) and LS to improve LS more efficiently. In this study, growth traits of line OR_LS were evaluated by estimating the correlated response on weaning weight (WW), slaughter weight (SW) and GR during fattening period as well as their variability (DWW, DSW and DGR, respectively). Data were analyzed using Bayesian inference methods. Heritability estimates were low for growth traits (0.09, 0.13 and 0.14 for WW, SW and GR, respectively) and negligible for growth traits variability (0.01, 0.004 and 0.01 for DWW, DSW and DGR, respectively). Moderate common litter effect ratio (c2; 0.35, 0.28 and 0.27) and low maternal effect ratio (m2; 0.11, 0.05 and 0.01) were obtained for WW, SW and GR, respectively. Both c2 and m2 were lower at slaughter than at weaning. In addition, low common litter effect and negligible maternal effect were observed for growth traits variability. Genetic correlations between LS and both growth traits and their variability were close to zero. Positive genetic correlations were observed between OR and growth traits (0.19, 0.38 and 0.36 for WW, SW and GR, respectively) as well as between OR and growth traits variability (0.35, 0.62 and 0.20 for DWW, DSW and DGR, respectively). Positive correlated responses in both periods were obtained for growth traits, WW, SW and GR (0.037, 0.156 and 0.110 kg, respectively). The correlated response found in growth traits might be due to the positive genetic correlations between OR and these traits. However, selection for OR and LS using independent culling levels did not modify the growth traits variability. Therefore, no negative consequences on growth traits can be expected in current commercial maternal lines.

Keywords

genetic parametersgrowth rateslaughter weightgrowth traits variabilityweaning weight
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 11 , November 2019 , pp. 2457 - 2462
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

a

Present address: Instituto de Conservación y Mejora de la Agrodiversidad Valenciana, Universitat Politècnica de València, P.O. Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain

b

Present address: Animal Production Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Suez Canal University, 41522 Ismailia, Egypt

References

Argente, MJ, Santacreu, MA, Climent, A and Blasco, A 1999. Phenotypic and genetic parameters of birth weight and weaning weight of rabbits born from unilaterally ovariectomized and intact does. Livestock Production Science 57, 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badawy, AY, Peiró, R, Blasco, A and Santacreu, MA 2019. Correlated responses on litter traits and survival traits after two-stage selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits. Animal 13, 453–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bidanel, JP, Gruand, J and Legault, C 1996. Genetic variability of age and weight at puberty, ovulation rate and embryo survival in gilts and relationship with production traits. Genetics Selection Evolution 28, 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, PJ, Engl, ME, Young, LD and Zimmerman, DR 1979. Selection for ovulation rate in swine: correlated response in litter size and weight. Journal of Animal Science 48, 509–516.10.2527/jas1979.483509xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damgaard, LH, Rydhmer, L, Løvendahl, P and Grandinson, K 2003. Genetic parameters for within-litter variation in piglet birth weight and change in within-litter variation during suckling. Journal of Animal Science 80, 604–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drouilhet, L, Gilbert, H, Balmisse, E, Ruesche, J, Tircazes, A, Larzul, C and Garreau, H 2013. Genetic parameters for two selection criteria for feed efficiency in rabbits. Journal of Animal Science 91, 3121–3128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drummond, H, Vázquez, E, Sánchez-Colón, S, Martínez-Gómez, M and Hudson, R 2000. Competition for milk in the domestic rabbit: survivors benefit from littermate deaths. Ethology 106, 511–526.10.1046/j.1439-0310.2000.00554.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
García, ML and Baselga, M 2002. Estimation of correlated response on growth traits to selection in litter size of rabbits using cryopreserved control population and genetic trends. Livestock Production Science 78, 91–98.10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00093-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsu, WL and Johnson, RK 2014. Analysis of 28 generations of selection for reproduction, growth, and carcass traits in swine. Journal of Animal Science 92, 4806–4822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legarra, A, Varona, L and López de Maturana, E 2008. Program TM. Retrieved on 28 September 2017 from http://snp.toulouse.inra.fr/~alegarra/ Google Scholar
Mínguez, C, Sánchez, JP, el Nagar, AG, Ragab, M and Baselga, M 2016. Growth traits of four maternal lines of rabbits founded on different criteria: comparisons at foundation and at last periods after selection. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 133, 303–315.10.1111/jbg.12197CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mocé, ML and Santacreu, MA 2010. Genetic improvement of litter size in rabbits: a review. In Proceeding of the 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 1–6 August 2010, Leipzig, Germany, communication 25.Google Scholar
Poigner, J, Szendrő, Z, Lévai, A, Bíró-Németh, E and Radnai, I 2000. Weight of new-born rabbits in relation to their number and position within the uterus in unilaterally ovariectomised does. World Rabbit Science 8, 231–237.Google Scholar
Rosendo, A, Canario, L, Druet, T, Gogue, J and Bidanel, JP 2007. Correlated responses of pre- and postweaning growth and backfat thickness to six generations of selection for ovulation rate or prenatal survival in French Large White pigs. Journal of Animal Science 85, 3209–3217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruíz-Flores, A and Johnson, RK 2001. Direct and correlated responses to two-stage selection for ovulation rate and number of fully formed pigs at birth in swine. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2286–2297.10.2527/2001.7992286xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolf, J, Záková, E and Groeneveld, E 2008. Within-litter variation of birth weight in hyperprolific Czech Large White sows and its relation to litter size traits, stillborn piglets and losses until weaning. Livestock Science 115, 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, T, Wang, LG, Shi, HB, Yan, H, Zhang, LC, Liu, X, Pu, L, Liang, J, Zhang, YB, Zhao, KB and Wang, LX 2016. Heritabilities and genetic and phenotypic correlations of litter uniformity and litter size in Large White sows. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 15, 848–854.10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61155-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar