Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:56:38.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scope for selecting many breeding stocks of possible economic value in the future

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. Smith
C. Smith
Affiliation:
AFRC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Abstract

Current animal improvement deals largely with selection of stocks for current economic objectives. However, there is uncertainty about how well these objectives will hold in the future, since husbandry and marketing needs and conditions may change unpredictably over time. The scope for developing alternative stocks, selected for different chosen sets of objectives, is considered, so that by substitution or crossing it may be possible to reduce the uncertainty and better meet future needs and conditions. The reduction in uncertainty is modelled by including risk or uncertainty in the discount rate in assessing benefits over time from one cycle of selection. From the national viewpoint, the costs of developing alternative selection stocks are small relative to the possible returns. Thus, if the uncertainties were reduced by having them, a large number of such alternative stocks would be justified. The expected benefits to the community from animal breeding would also be increased thereby.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , December 1985 , pp. 403 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1985

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

Bird, P. J. W. N. and Mitchell, G. 1980. The choice of discount rate in animal breeding investment appraisal. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 48: 499–505.Google Scholar
Burrows, P. M. 1984. Inbreeding under selection from related families. Biometrics 40: 357–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Central Statistical Office. 1982. Annual Abstract of Statistics. Edition No. 118. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. A. 1984. Efficiency of milk production in cattle. Br. Cattle Breeders Club, Cambridge. Digest 39: 18–20.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1972. Estimation of genetic change. 1. General theory and design of control populations. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 40: 1–15.Google Scholar
Land, R. B. 1981. An alternative philosophy for livestock breeding. Livest. Prod. Sci. 8: 95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layard, R. 1972. Cost-Benefit Analysis. Penguin, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
Pearce, D. W. 1971. Cost-Benefit Analysis. Macmillan, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. 1978. The effect of inflation and form of investment on the estimated value of genetic improvement in farm livestock. Anim. Prod. 26: 101–110.Google Scholar
Smith, C. 1981. Levels of investment in testing and genetic improvement of livestock. Livest. Prod. Sci. 8: 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. 1984a. Estimated costs of genetic conservation in farm animals. 44/1 FAO/UNEP Joint Expert Panel on Animal Genetic Resources, Conservation and Management. Fd Agric. Org., Rome.Google Scholar
Smith, C. 1984b. Rates of genetic change in farm livestock. Res. Dev. Agric. 1: 79–85.Google Scholar
Tess, M. W., Bennett, G. L. and Dickerson, G. E. 1983. Simulation of genetic changes in life cycle efficiency of pork production. I. A bioeconomic model. II. Effects of components on efficiency. III. Effects of management systems and feed prices on importance of genetic components. J. Anim. Sci. 56: 336–353, 354–368, 369–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, A. J. 1983. Future directions in pig breeding. Agricultural Research Council Conf. on Current Awareness in Pig Research, Nottingham Univ.Google Scholar