Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:17:40.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth in mice after selection on maize-milk diets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

Nigel Bateman
Nigel Bateman
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Summary

Six lines of mice were fed distinctive fixed or shifting diets while being selected for fast growth in the first two weeks after weaning. The intention was to provide alternative routes for the improvement of growth with respect to a maize diet (100% maize) where controls grew 6 g, an optimum diet (76% maize, 24% milk) where controls grew 17 g, and a ‘milk’ diet (16% maize, 84% milk) where controls grew 12 g. After 10 generations of selection the lines, hybrids and unselected controls were compared on these and intermediate diets. Realized genetic correlations between growth on optimal and suboptimal diets depended on the feeding regime in which selection was practised, and were significantly higher in lines that were selected on suboptimal diets. When the selected lines were tested on unfamiliar suboptimal diets they were hardly better than controls, but on their own diets and also on the optimum diet were about 6 g heavier. Peak growth was never much greater than on 76% maize and was made on diets containing between 58% and 82% maize. With one exception, the hybrids grew on each test diet about as well as did the best selected line.

A genetic limitation was encountered on the optimum diet. The growth there of the mice selected on either milk or maize diets was not improved upon by the mice actually selected on the optimum diet.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , October 1974 , pp. 233 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1974

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

REFERENCES

Bailey, C. M., Hammack, S. P., Harvey, W. R. and Probert, C. L. 1970. Sire linex nutritional regimen interaction: effects on postweaning performance of the rat. J. Anim. Sci. 30: 337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, N. 1971a. Effects of diets consisting of maize and milk on growth and carcass characteristics of mice. Anim. Prod. 13: 413–424.Google Scholar
Bateman, N. 1971b. Selection of mice for growth on constant and on changing maizemilk diets. Anim. Prod. 13: 425–440.Google Scholar
Bohren, B. B., Hill, W. G. and Robertson, A. 1966. Some observations on asymmetrical correlated responses to selection. Genet. Res. 7: 44–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donald, H. P. 1963. Perinatal deaths among calves in a crossbred dairy herd. Anim. Prod. 5: 87–95.Google Scholar
Donald, H. P. and Russell, W. S. 1968. Some aspects of fertility in purebred and crossbred dairy cattle. Anim. Prod. 10: 465–471.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1952. The problem of environment and selection. Am. Nat. 86: 293–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1960a. Selection of mice for growth on high and low planes of nutrition. Genet. Res. 1: 91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1960b. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh and London.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. and Latyszewski, M. 1952. The environment in relation to selection for size in mice. J. Genet. 51: 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grifhng, B. and Zsiros, E. 1971. Heterosis associated with genotype-environment interactions. Genetics, Princeton 68: 443–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1971. Design and efficiency of selection experiments for estimating genetic parameters. Biometrics 27: 293–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kownacki, M. and Gebler, E. 1972. Genotype-environment interaction exemplified in mice. Genetica Polonica 13: 185–191.Google Scholar
Pederson, D. G. 1968. Environmental stress, heterozyygote advantage and genotypeenvironment interaction in Arabidopsis. Heredity 23: 127–138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed