Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:04:44.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on using biased parameter values and non-random mating to reduce rates of inbreeding in selection programmes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

B. Grundy ,
A. Caballero ,
E. Santiago  and
W. G. Hill
B. Grundy
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT
A. Caballero
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT
E. Santiago
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT
W. G. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT
Get access

Abstract

The value of a parameter such as heritability (h2) or intra-dass correlation in best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) with the animal model or a family selection index affects both the rate of response achieved and the rate of inbreeding. If in BLUP an estimate of h2 is used which is biased upwards above its actual value, the rate of inbreeding can be substantially reduced with little reduction in the rate of response. Further, by mating individuals from families in which many are selected to others from families with few selected (compensatory mating), rates of inbreeding can be further reduced without substantial effect on response.

Keywords

best linear unbiased predictiongeneticsinbreedingmating systemsselection index
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 59 , Issue 3 , December 1994 , pp. 465 - 468
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

Brisbane, J. R. and Gibson, J. P. 1993. Selection methods to reduce inbreeding with minimal effect on genetic progress. journal of Dairy Science 76: suppl. 1, p. 292 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Buhner, M. G. 1980. The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Gama, L. T. and Smith, C. 1993. The role of inbreeding depression in livestock production systems. Livestock Production Science 36: 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grundy, B. and Hill, W. G. 1993. A method for reducing inbreeding with best linear unbiased prediction. Animal Production 56: 427 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R. 1984. Application of linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, Canada.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1976. Order statistics of correlated variables and implications in genetic selection programmes. Biometrics 32: 889–902.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lush, J. L. 1947. Family merit and individual merit as bases for selection. American Naturalist 81: 241–261, 362–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. 1961. Inbreeding in artificial selection programmes. Genetical Research 2: 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sales, J. and Hill, W. G. 1976. Effect of sampling errors on efficiency of selection indices. 1. Use of information from relatives for single trait improvement. Animal Production 22: 1–17.Google Scholar
Santiago, E. and Caballero, A. 1994. Effective size of populations under selection. Genetics. In press.Google Scholar
Toro, M. and Pérez-Enciso, M. 1990. Optimization of selection response under restricted inbreeding. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 22: 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verrier, E., Colleau, J. J. and Foulley, J. L. 1993. Long term effects of selection based on animal model BLUP in a finite population. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 87: 446–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villanueva, B., Woolliams, J. A. and Simm, G. 1995. Strategies for controlling rates of inbreeding in adult MOET nucleus schemes for beef cattle. Genetics, Selection, Evolution. In press.Google Scholar
Webb, A. J. 1989. Animal breeding practice. In Evolution and animal breeding (ed. Hill, W. G. and Mackay, T. F. C.), pp. 195–202. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon.Google Scholar
Woolliams, J. A. and Meuwissen, T. H. E. 1993. Decision rules and variance of responses in breeding schemes. Animal Production 56: 179–186.Google Scholar
Wray, N. R. and Hill, W. G. 1989. Asymptotic rates of responses from index selection. Animal Production 49: 217–227.Google Scholar
Wray, N. R. and Thompson, R. 1990. Prediction of rates of inbreeding in selected populations. Genetical Research 55: 41–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wray, N. R., Woolliams, J. A. and Thompson, R. 1994. Prediction of rates of inbreeding in population undergoing index selection. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 87: 878–892.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed