Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T16:58:05.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2018

A. Y. Badawy ,
R. Peiró ,
A. Blasco  and
M. A. Santacreu
A. Y. Badawy
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Animal, Universitat Politècnica de València, P.O. Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain
R. Peiró
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

Farmer profit depends on the number of slaughter rabbits. The improvement of litter size (LS) at birth by two-stage selection for ovulation rate (OR) and LS could modify survival rate from birth to slaughter. This study was aiming to estimate direct and correlated response on LS traits and peri- and postnatal survival traits in the OR_LS rabbit line selected first only for OR (first period) and then for OR and LS using independent culling levels (second period). The studied traits were OR, LS measured as number of total born, number of kits born alive (NBA) and dead (NBD), and number of kits at weaning (NW) and young rabbits at slaughter (NS). Prenatal survival (LS/OR) and survival at birth (NBA/LS), at weaning (NW/NBA) and at slaughter (NS/NW) were also studied. Data were analysed using Bayesian inference methods. Heritability for LS traits were low, 0.07 for NBA, NW and NS. Survival traits had low values of heritability 0.07, 0.03 and 0.03 for NBA/LS, NW/NBA and NS/NW, respectively. After six generations of selection by OR (first period), a small increase in NBD and a slight decrease in NBA/LS were found. However, no correlated responses on NW/NBA and NS/NW were observed. After 11 generations of two-stage selection for OR and LS (second period), correlated responses on NBA, NW and NS were 0.12, 0.12 and 0.11 kits per generation, respectively, whereas no substantial modifications on NBA/LS, NW/NBA and NS/NW were found. In conclusion, two-stage selection improves the number of young rabbits at slaughter without modifying survival from birth to slaughter.

Keywords

kits deadprenatal survivalperinatal survivalpre-weaning survivalpost-weaning survival
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , March 2019 , pp. 453 - 459
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2018 

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

b

Present address: Instituto de Conservación y Mejora de la Agrodiversidad Valenciana, Universitat Politècnica de València.

References

Arango, J, Misztal, I, Tsuruta, S, Culbertson, M and Herring, W 2005. Threshold-linear estimation of genetic parameters for farrowing mortality, litter size, and test performance of Large White sows. Journal of Animal Science 83, 499–506.Google Scholar
Argente, MJ, Santacreu, MA, Climent, A and Blasco, A 2006. Influence of uterine available space per fetus on fetal development and prenatal survival in rabbits selected on uterine capacity. Livestock Science 102, 83–91.Google Scholar
Bennett, GL and Leymaster, KA 1989. Integration of ovulation rate, potential embryonic viability and uterine capacity into a model of litter size in swine. Journal of Animal Science 67, 1230–1241.Google Scholar
Blasco, A 2017. Bayesian data analysis for animal scientists. Springer, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Cartuche, L, Pascual, M, Gómez, EA and Blasco, A 2014. Economic weights in rabbit meat production. World Rabbit Science 22, 165–177.Google Scholar
Cunningham, PJ, England, 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.Google 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 81, 604–610.Google Scholar
Foxcroft, GR, Dixon, WT, Dyck, MK, Novak, S, Harding, JC and Almeida, FC 2009. Prenatal programming of postnatal development in the pig. Society Reproductive Fertility 66, 213–231.Google Scholar
García, ML and Baselga, M 2002a. Estimation of genetic response to selection in litter size of rabbits using a cryopreserved control population. Livestock Production Science 74, 45–53.Google Scholar
García, ML and Baselga, M 2002b. Genetic response to selection for reproductive performance in a maternal line of rabbits. World Rabbit Science 10, 71–76.Google Scholar
Johnson, RK, Nielsen, MK and Casey, DS 1999. Responses in ovulation rate, embryonal survival and litter traits in swine to 14 generations of selection to increase litter size. Journal of Animal Science 77, 541–557.Google Scholar
Kapell, DN, Ashworth, CJ, Knap, PW and Roehe, R 2011. Genetic parameters for piglet survival, litter size and birth weight or its variation within litter in sire and dam lines using Bayesian analysis. Livestock Science 135, 215–224.Google Scholar
Laborda, P, Mocé, ML, Blasco, A and Santacreu, MA 2012. Selection for ovulation rate in rabbits: direct and correlated responses estimated with a cryopreserved control population. Journal of Animal Science 90, 3392–3397.Google Scholar
Laborda, P, Mocé, ML, Santacreu, MA and Blasco, A 2011. Selection for ovulation rate in rabbits: I. Genetic parameters, direct response and correlated response on litter size. Journal of Animal Science 89, 2981–2987.Google Scholar
Lamberson, WR, Johnson, RK, Zimmerman, DR and Long, TE 1991. Direct response to selection for increased litter size, decreased age at puberty, or random selection following selection for ovulation rate in swine. Journal of Animal Science 69, 3129–3143.Google Scholar
Legarra, A, Varona, L and López de Maturana, E. 2008. Program TM. Retrieved on 6 September 2017 from http://snp.toulouse.inra. fr/~alegarra/ Google Scholar
Lents, CA, Cushman, RA and Freking, BA 2014. Measures of the ovaries and uterus during development of gilts selected for differences in uterine capacity. Journal of Animal Science 92, 2433–2439.Google Scholar
Lund, MS, Puonti, M, Rydhmer, L and Jensen, J 2002. Relationship between litter size and perinatal and pre-weaning survival in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2117–2222.Google Scholar
Nielsen, B, Su, G, Lund, MS and Madsen, P 2013. Selection for increased number of piglets at d 5 after farrowing has increased litter size and reduced piglet mortality. Journal of Animal Science 91, 2575–2582.Google Scholar
Peiró, R, Herrler, A, Santacreu, MA, Merchán, M, Argente, MJ, García, ML, Folch, JM and Blasco, A 2010. Expression of progesterone receptor related to the polymorphism in the PGR gene in the rabbit reproductive tract. Journal of Animal Science 88, 421–427.Google Scholar
Putz, AM, Tiezzi, F, Maltecca, C, Gray, KA and Knauer, MT 2015. Variance component estimates for alternative litter size traits in swine. Journal of Animal Science 93, 5153–5163.Google Scholar
Ragab, M and Baselga, M 2011. A comparison of reproductive traits of four maternal lines of rabbits selected for litter size at weaning and founded on different criteria. Livestock Production Science 136, 201–206.Google Scholar
Rosendo, A, Druet, T, Gogué, J, Canario, L and Bidanel, JP 2007. Correlated responses for litter traits to six generations of selection for ovulation rate or prenatal survival in French Large White pigs. Journal of Animal Science 85, 1615–1624.Google Scholar
Ruiz-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, 2286–2299.Google Scholar
Santacreu, MA, Mocé, ML, Climent, A and Blasco, A 2005. Divergent selection for uterine capacity in rabbits. II. Correlated response in litter size and its components estimated with a cryopreserved control population. Journal of Animal Science 83, 2303–2307.Google Scholar
Su, G, Lund, MS and Sorensen, D. 2007. Selection for litter size at day five to improve litter size at weaning and piglet survival rate. Journal of Animal Science 85, 1385–1392.Google Scholar
Ziadi, C, Mocé, ML, Laborda, P, Blasco, A and Santacreu, MA 2013. Genetic selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits: estimation of genetic parameters and direct and correlated responses. Journal of Animal Science 91, 3113–3120.Google Scholar