Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T01:13:45.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection for hyaluronic acid production traits: direct and correlated responses in two White Leghorn lines selected for cockerel comb size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

B. Tufvesson ,
M. Tufvesson ,
K. Johansson  and
M. Wilhelmson
B. Tufvesson
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, S-755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
M. Tufvesson
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, S-755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
K. Johansson
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, S-755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
M. Wilhelmson
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, S-755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a polysaccharide preferably extracted from cockerel combs and used for medical purposes, mainly eye surgery. One way of increasing the production of HA from cockerels is to increase the size of the combs. The aim of this work was to study comb development and quantify direct and correlated responses for comb size at different ages and comb weight in two lines of White Leghorn selected for comb size at two different ages. Two lines were created, one selected for comb size at 16 weeks of age (CS16) (line E = early comb development) and the other for comb size at 29 weeks of age (CS29) (line A = adult comb size). There were between 500 and 800 birds of each line and generation and the lines had been selected for five generations. Cockerels in line E developed the combs at an earlier age and had smaller 29-week combs compared with the cockerels in line A. Genetic gain for the selection trait in generation five, measured in relation to line means in generation 1, was 58% in line E and 36% in line A. The corresponding correlated response for CS29 and comb weight (CW) in line E was 28% and 25% respectively, while for CS16 and CW in line A it was 46% and 35%. The results indicated that it is possible to increase cockerel comb size at both 16 and 29 weeks of age through selection.

Keywords

cockscombcorrelated responseshyaluronic acidpoultryselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 66 , Issue 3 , June 1998 , pp. 751 - 757
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Äberg, B. 1985. Bestämning av genetiska och fenotypiska parametrar för egenskaper av betydelse för Hyaluronsyraproduktion ur tuppkammar. Publikationer frin husdjursfdradling och sjukdomsgenetik. Examensarbete no. Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet. Uppsala.Google Scholar
Aire, T. A. 1973. Development of puberty in Nigerian and White Leghorn cockerels. Poultry Science 52: 1765–1769.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ayoub, H., Amer, M. F. and Shalash, S. 1980. Genetic correlation between length of wattles and female body weight at sexual maturity in the fowl. Annales Gene'tique de Selection Animale 12: 201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, W. 1953. The effect of sex hormones on comb growth in immature pullets. Journal of Endocrinology 9: 440–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dea, I. C. M., Moorhouse, R. and Rees, D. A. 1973. Hyaluronic acid. Novel, double helical molecule. Science 179: 560–562CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gowe, R. S. and Fairfull, R. W. 1984. Effect of selection for part-record number of eggs from housing vs. selection for hen-day rate of production from age at first egg. Annales Agriculturae Fenniae 23: 196–203.Google Scholar
Jensen, J., Madsen, P., Mantysaari, E. and Thompson, R. 1996. Residual maximum likelihood estimation of (co)variance components in multivariate mixed linear models using average information. Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics 49: 215–236.Google Scholar
Johansson, K. 1992. Programs for single trait and multiple trait analysis with derivative free REML. User's notes. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Kuenzel, W. J. and Sharp, P. J. 1985. Parasagittal hypothalamic knife cuts in male chicks; advancement of reproductive function and changes in plasma concentrations of luteinising hormone and androgen. British Poultry Science 26: 199–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liljedahl, L.-E., Kolstad, N., Sorensen, P. and Maijala, K. 1979. Scandinavian selection and crossbreeding experiment with laying hens. 1. Background and general outline. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica 29: 273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsson, B. and Karlstam, B. 1973. The use of the folinciocalten phenol reagent for the determination of the protein content in rooster comb hyaluronic acid. Forskningsrapport 7 s. Uppsala: Pharmacia.Google Scholar
Parker, J. E., McKenzie, F. F. and Kempster, H. L. 1942. Development of the testis and combs of White Leghorn and New Hampshire cockerels. Poultry Science 21: 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. 1959. The sampling variance of the genetic correlation coefficient. Biometrics 15: 469–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segura, J. C., Gavora, J. S., Fairfull, R. W., Gowe, R. S. and Buckland, R. B. 1990. Heritability estimates of male reproductive and morphological traits and their genetic correlations with female egg production and other related traits in chickens. Poultry Science 69: 493–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, P. J., Culbert, J. and Wells, J. W. 1977. Variations in stored and plasma concentrations of androgens and luteinizing hormone during sexual development in the cockerel. Journal of Endocrinology 74: 467–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silver, F. H. and Swann, D. A. 1982. Laser light scattering measurements on vitreous and rooster comb hyaluronic acids. International Journal of Biology, Macromolecules 4: 425–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, D. A. and Kennedy, B. W. 1983. The use of the relationship matrix to account for genetic drift variance in the analysis of genetic experiments. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 66: 217–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sterling, R. J., Sharp, P. J., Klandorf, H., Harvey, S. and Lea, R. W. 1984. Plasma concentrations of luteinising hormone, follicle stimulating hormone, androgen, growth hormone, prolactin, thyroxine and triiodothyronine during growth and sexual development in the cockerel. British Poultry Science 25: 353–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sugahara, K., Schwartz, N. B. and Dorfman, A. 1979. Biosynthesis of hyaluronic acid by Streptococcus. Journal of Biological Chemistry 254: 6252–6261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Werf, J. H. J. van der and Boer, I. J. M. de. 1990. Estimation of additive genetic variance when base populations are selected. Journal of Animal Science 68: 3124–3132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoo, B. H., Sheldon, B. L. and Podger, R. N. 1988. Genetic parameters for oviposition time and interval in a White Leghorn population of recent commercial origin. British Poultry Science 29: 627–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar