Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:06:18.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of the simple breeding value model and the maternal effects model for genetic evaluation of Segureña lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

M. Analla ,
A. Muñoz-Serrano  and
J. M. Serradilla
M. Analla
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Abdelmalek Essaadi University, PO Box 2121, 93002 Tétouan, Morocco
A. Muñoz-Serrano
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, University of Cordoba, Medina Azahara 9, 14005 Córdoba, Spain
J. M. Serradilla
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, University of Córdoba, PO Box 3048, 14080 Córdoba, Spain
Get access

Abstract

Weaning weight in a single flock of 600 ewes and 40 rams was simulated through 30 consecutive lambings. The objective was to compare the simple breeding value model with the maternal effects model for lamb evaluation under the Segureña selection scheme. Three selection strategies were tested: selection on breeding values estimated by a simple breeding value model that ignores maternal effects (method 1), selection on direct additive values only (method 2) or on the sum of direct and maternal additive values (method 3), both latter methods utilizing a maternal effects model. Average values obtained in the last lamb crop were about 18 kg for the phenotypic mean, about 5 kg for direct additive values and about -1 kg for maternal additive values, for all three methods. Average inbreeding coefficient of the last crop was more than 0·13 in method 1 but was less than 0·12 in the others. All differences were not statistically significant (P > 0·05). Consequently, the simple breeding value model can be used for the genetic evaluation of weaning weight of candidates for selection in the Segureña scheme. The effect of variation in the magnitude of parameters was evaluated through four sets of parameters. Results showed that with a higher additive maternal component, method (3) would become increasingly necessary. The need for method (3) is accentuated with more negative additive covariance between direct and maternal effects. Thus, for higher maternal effects or more negative additive correlation, the use of the complete model (with maternal effects) becomes unavoidable. Varying population size, however, affects only the inbreeding accumulated, as long as the same methods of selection are used.

Keywords

genetic gaininbreedingsheepsimulationweaning weight
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 68 , Issue 3 , April 1999 , pp. 427 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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

Anaila, M., Muñoz-Serrano, A., Cruz, J. M. and Serradilla, J. M. 1995. Estimation of genetic parameters of growth traits in Segureña lambs. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 112: 183–190.Google Scholar
Blackwell, R. L. 1986. Growth and maternal ability. In Proceedings of the US-Spain joint seminar on sheep breeding (ed. Gabina, D. and Burfening, P. J.), Zaragoza, Spain, pp. 165–184.Google Scholar
Hagger, C. 1991. Effect of selection on phenotype, on index or on breeding values on expected response, genetic relationship and accuracy of breeding values in an experiment. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 108: 102–110.Google Scholar
Hanrahan, J. P. 1976. Maternal effects and selection response with an application to sheep data. Animal Production 22: 359–369.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R. 1984. Linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.Google Scholar
Laloë, D. 1994. Application du modèle animal aux bovins allaittants. In Séminaire Modèle Animal (ed. Foulley, J. L. and .Molénat, M), pp. 91–98. La-Colle-sur-Loup, France.Google Scholar
Leitch, H. W., Smith, C Burnside, E. B. and Qyinton, M. 1994. Genetic response and inbreeding with different selection methods and mating designs for nucleus breeding programs of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 1702–1718.Google Scholar
María, G. A., Boldman, K. G. and Van Vleck, L. D. 1993. Estimates of variances due to direct and maternal effects for growth traits of Romanov sheep. Journal of Animal Science 71: 845–849.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. 1992. Bias and sampling covariances of estimates of variance components due to maternal effects. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 24: 487–498.Google Scholar
Quaas, R. L. 1976. Computing the diagonal elements and inverse of a large numerator relationship matrix. Biometrics 32: 949–953.Google Scholar
Quinton, M., Smith, C. and Goddard, M.E. 1992. Comparison of selection methods at the same level of inbreeding. Journal of Animal Science 70: 1060–1067.Google Scholar
Roehe, R. and Kennedy, B. W. 1993. Efficiency of an approximate animal model for maternal and direct genetic effect of litter size in swine. Journal of Animal Science 71: 3251–3260.Google Scholar
Shi, M. J., Laloë, D., Ménissier, F. and Renand, G. 1993. Estimation of genetic parameters of preweaning performance in the French Limousine cattle breed. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 25: 177–189.Google Scholar
Southwood, D. I., Kennedy, B. W. and Gibson, J. P. 1989. Estimation of additive maternal and cytoplasmic genetic variances in animal models. Journal of Dairy Science 72: 3006–3012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1993. SAS/STAT user’s guide, release 6.03, volumes 1 and 2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Tosh, J. J. and Kemp, K. K. 1994. Estimation of variance components for lamb weight in three sheep populations. Journal of Animal Science 72: 1184–1190.Google Scholar
Uimari, P. and Mäki-Tanila, A. 1992. Accuracy of genetic evaluation in dominance genetic models allowing for inbreeding. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 109: 401–407.Google Scholar
Waldron, D. F., Morris, C. A., Baker, R. L. and Johnson, D. L. 1993. Maternal effects for growth traits in beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 34: 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wewala, G. S., Anderson, R. D. and Rae, A. L. 1986. Maximum likelihood estimators of variance components for direct and maternal effects of weaning weight of Romney sheep. In Proceedings of the third world congress on genetics applied to livestock production (ed. Dickerson, E. G. and Johnson, R. K.), Lincoln, vol. 11, pp. 312–317.Google Scholar