Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T06:58:36.981Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic variation for resistance to clinical and subclinical diseases exists in growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

M. Henryon ,
P. Berg ,
J. Jensen  and
S. Andersen
M. Henryon*
Affiliation:
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Research Centre Foulum, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
P. Berg
Affiliation:
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Research Centre Foulum, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
J. Jensen
Affiliation:
Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Research Centre Foulum, PO Box 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
S. Andersen
Affiliation:
National Committee for Pig Breeding, Health and Production, Axeltorv 3, Copenhagen V, Denmark
*
†E-mail:Mark.Henryon@agrsci.dk
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to test that genetic variation for resistance to clinical and subclinical diseases exists in growing pigs. A total of 13 551 male growing pigs were assessed for resistance to five categories of clinical and subclinical disease: (i) any clinical or subclinical disease, (ii) lameness, (iii) respiratory diseases, (iv) diarrhoea, and (v) other diseases (i.e. any clinical or subclinical disease with the exception of (ii), (iii), and (iv)). Additive genetic variation for resistance to each disease category was estimated by fitting a Weibull, sire-dam frailty model to time until the pigs were first diagnosed with a disease from that category. Genetic correlations among the resistances to each disease category were approximated as product-moment correlations among predicted breeding values of the sires. Additive genetic variation was detected for resistance to (i) any clinical or subclinical disease (additive genetic variance for log-frailty (± s.e.) = 0·18 ± 0·05, heritability on the logarithmic-time scale = 0·10), (ii) lameness (0·29 ± 0·11, 0·16), (iii) respiratory diseases (0·24 ± 0·16, 0·12), (iv) diarrhoea (0·30 ± 0·27, 0·16), and (v) the other diseases (0·34 ± 0·15, 0·19) and there were generally positive and low-to-moderate correlations among the predicted breeding values (-0·03 to + 0·65). These results demonstrate that additive genetic variation for resistance to clinical and subclinical diseases does exist in growing pigs, and suggests that selective breeding for resistance could be successful.

Keywords

disease resistancegenetic variationpigs.
Type
Breeding and genetics
Information
Animal Science , Volume 73 , Issue 3 , December 2001 , pp. 375 - 387
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2001

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

Biozzi, G., Mouton, D., Heumann, A. M. and Bouthillier, Y. 1982. Genetic regulation of immunoresponsiveness in relation to resistance against infectious diseases. Proceedings of the second world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Madrid, vol. 5, pp. 150–163.Google Scholar
Cox, D. R. 1972. Regression models and life-tables (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (Series B) 34: 187–220.Google Scholar
Curtis, S.E. and Backstrom, L. 1992. Housing and Environmental Influences on Production. In Diseases of swine, seventh edition (ed. Leman, A.D., Straw, B.E., Mengeling, W.L., Allaire, S.D. and Taylor, D.J.), pp. 884–900. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
Ducrocq, V. 1999. Topics that may deserve further attention in survival analysis applied to dairy cattle breeding – some suggestions. Interbull Bulletin 21: 181–189.Google Scholar
Ducrocq, V. and Casella, G. 1996. A Bayesian analysis of mixed survival models. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 28: 505–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducrocq, V. and Sölkner, J. 1998. ‘The Survival Kit’, a package for large analyses of survival data. Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Armidale, vol. 27, pp. 447–448.Google Scholar
Heringstad, B., Klemetsdal, G. and Ruane, J. 2000. Selection for mastitis resistance in dairy cattle: a review with focus on the situation in the Nordic countries. Livestock Production Science 64: 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jørgensen, B. 1992. Group-level effects of breed and sire on diseases, and influence of diseases on performance of pigs in Danish test stations. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 14: 281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalbfleisch, J. D. and Prentice, R. L. 1980. The statistical analysis of failure time data. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Kaplan, E. L. and Meier, P. 1958. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 53: 457–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knap, P. W. and Bishop, S. C. 2000. Relationships between genetic change and infectious disease in domestic livestock. In The challenge of genetic change in animal production (ed. Hill, W.G., Bishop, S.C., McGuirk, B., McKay, J.C., Simm, G. and Webb, A.J.), British Society of Animal Science, occasional publication no. 27, pp. 65–80.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, I. R., Andersen, A. H. and Jensen, J. 1999. Discussion of heritability of survival traits. Interbull Bulletin 21: 31–35.Google Scholar
Lingaas, F. and Rønningen, K. 1991. Epidemiological and genetic studies in Norwegian pig herds. V. Estimates of heritability and phenotypic correlations of the most common diseases in Norwegian pig production. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 32: 115–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundeheim, N. 1979. Genetic analysis of respiratory diseases in pigs. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica 29: 209–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundeheim, N. 1988. Health disorders and growth performance at a Swedish pig progeny testing station. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica 38: 77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, D. T., Freeman, A. E. and Kuck, A. L. 1991. Genetics of health traits in Holstein cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 1092–1100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mäntysaari, E. A., Gröhn, Y. T. and Quass, R. L. 1991. Clinical ketosis: phenotypic and genetic correlations between occurrences and with yield. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3985–3993.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Müller, M. and Brem, G. 1991. Disease resistance in farm animals. Experientia 47: 923–934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myers, R. H. 1989. Classical and modern regression with applications, second edition. Duxbury Press, Belmont, California.Google Scholar
Nicholas, F. W. 1987. Veterinary genetics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Pedersen, J. and Aamand, G. P. 1999. From recording to the Danish total merit index. Interbull Bulletin 23: 117–122.Google Scholar
Pedersen, J., Johansen, E.Ø., Kristensen, O. K., Lykke, T., Neilsen, U. S., Stendal, M., Andersen, B. B., Christensen, L. G., Pedersen, G. A. and Petersen, P. H. 1993. [S-Index for bulls of milk and dual-purpose breeds.] Report no. 33. Landsudvalget for Kvæg, Denmark.Google Scholar
Philipson, J., Thafvelin, B. and Hedebro-Velander, I. 1980. Genetic studies on disease recordings in first lactation cows of Swedish dairy breeds. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica 30: 327–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohrer, G. A. and Beattie, C. W. 1999. Genetic influences on susceptibility to acquired diseases. In Diseases of swine, eighth edition (ed. Straw, B.E., Allaire, S.D., Mengeling, W.L. and Taylor, D.J.), pp. 977–984. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
Simianer, H., Solbu, H. and Schaeffer, L. R. 1991. Estimated genetic correlations between disease and yield traits in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 4358–4365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, C., King, J. W. B. and Gilbert, N. 1962. Genetic parameters of British Large White bacon pigs. Animal Production 4: 128–143.Google Scholar
Straw, B. E., Burgi, E. J., Hilley, H. D. and Leman, A. D. 1983. Pneumonia and atrophic rhinitis in pigs from a test station. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 182: 607–611.Google ScholarPubMed
Straw, B. E., Leman, A. D. and Robinson, R. A. 1984. Pneumonia and atrophic rhinitis in pigs from a test station – a follow-up study. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 185: 1544–1546.Google ScholarPubMed
Straw, B. E. and Rothschild, M. F. 1992. Genetic influences on liability to acquired disease. In Diseases of swine, seventh edition (ed. Leman, A.D., Straw, B.E., Mengeling, W.L., Allaire, S.D. and Taylor, D. J.), pp. 709–717. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
Uribe, H. A., Kennedy, B. W., Martin, S. W. and Kelton, D. F. 1995. Genetic parameters for common health disorders of Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 78: 421–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yazdi, M. H., Thompson, R., Ducrocq, V. and Visscher, P. M. 2000. Genetic parameters and response to selection in proportional hazard models. Book of abstracts of the 51st annual meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, vol. 6, p. 81.Google Scholar