Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T12:59:31.681Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic parameters for feed efficiency in Romane rams and responses to single-generation selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2019

F. Tortereau Open the ORCID record for F. Tortereau [Opens in a new window] ,
C. Marie-Etancelin ,
J.-L. Weisbecker ,
D. Marcon ,
F. Bouvier ,
C. Moreno-Romieux  and
D. François
F. Tortereau*
Affiliation:
GenPhySE, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan 31326, France
C. Marie-Etancelin
Affiliation:
GenPhySE, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan 31326, France
J.-L. Weisbecker
Affiliation:
GenPhySE, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan 31326, France
D. Marcon
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Experimental Unit Domaine de La Sapinière, Osmoy 18390, France
F. Bouvier
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Experimental Unit Domaine de La Sapinière, Osmoy 18390, France
C. Moreno-Romieux
Affiliation:
GenPhySE, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan 31326, France
D. François
Affiliation:
GenPhySE, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse, Université de Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan 31326, France
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Feeding costs represent one of the highest expenditures in animal production systems. Breeding efficient animals that express their growth potential while eating less is therefore a major objective for breeders. We estimated the genetic parameters for feed intake, feed efficiency traits (residual feed intake (RFI) and feed conversion ratio (FCR)), growth and body composition traits in the Romane meat sheep breed. In these traits, selection responses to single-generation divergent selection on RFI were evaluated. From 2009 to 2016, a total of 951 male lambs were tested for 8 weeks starting from 3 months of age. They were weighed at the beginning and at the end of the testing period. Backfat thickness and muscle depth were recorded at the end of the testing period through ultrasound measurements. Feed intake was continuously recorded over the testing period using the automatic concentrate feeders. The heritability of RFI was estimated at 0.45 ± 0.08, which was higher than the heritability of FCR (0.30 ± 0.08). No significant genetic correlations were observed between RFI and growth traits. A favourable low negative genetic correlation was estimated between RFI and muscle depth (−0.30 ± 0.15), though additional data are needed to confirm these results. The selection of low RFI sires based on their breeding values led to the production of lambs eating significantly less concentrate (3% decrease in the average daily feed intake), but with the same growth as lambs from sires selected based on high RFI breeding values. We concluded that in meat sheep, RFI is a heritable trait that is genetically independent of post-weaning growth and body composition traits. A one-generation divergent selection based on RFI breeding values highlighted that substantial gains in feeding costs can be expected in selection schemes for meat sheep breeds.

Keywords

residual feed intakesheepdivergent selectionbody compositiongrowth
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , April 2020 , pp. 681 - 687
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2019 

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

Archer, JA, Arthur, PF, Herd, RM, Parnell, PF and Pitchford, WS 1997. Optimum postweaning test for measurement of growth rate, feed intake, and feed efficiency in British breed cattle. Journal of Animal Science 75, 2024–2032.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arthur, PF, Archer, JA, Johnston, DJ, Herd, RM, Richardson, EC and Parnell, PF 2001. Genetic and phenotypic variance and covariance components for feed intake, feed efficiency, and other postweaning traits in Angus cattle. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2805–2811.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, DP and Crowley, JJ 2013. Cell biology symposium: genetics of feed efficiency in dairy and beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 91, 1594–1613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cammack, KM, Leymaster, KA, Jenkins, TG and Nielsen, MK 2005. Estimates of genetic parameters for feed intake, feeding behavior, and daily gain in composite ram lambs. Journal of Animal Science 83, 777–785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cantalapiedra-Hijar, G, Abo-Ismail, M, Carstens, GE, Guan, LL, Hegarty, R, Kenny, DA, McGee, M, Plastow, G, Relling, A and Ortigues-Marty, I 2018. Review: Biological determinants of between-animal variation in feed efficiency of growing beef cattle. Animal 12 (S2), s321–s335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockrum, RR, Stobart, RH, Lake, SL and Cammack, KM 2013. Phenotypic variation in residual feed intake and performance traits in rams. Small Ruminant Research 113, 313–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drouilhet, L, Basso, B, Bernadet, M-D, Cornuez, A, Bodin, L, David, I, Gilbert, H and Marie-Etancelin, C 2014. Improving residual feed intake of mule progeny of Muscovy ducks: genetic parameters and responses to selection with emphasis on carcass composition and fatty liver quality. Journal of Animal Science 92, 4287–4296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drouilhet, L, Gilbert, H, Balmisse, E, Ruesche, J, Tircazes, A, Larzul, C and Garreau, H 2013. Genetic parameters for two selection criteria for feed efficiency in rabbits. Journal of Animal Science 91, 3121–3128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durunna, ON, Plastow, G, Mujibi, FDN, Grant, J, Mah, J, Basarab, JA, Okine, EK, Moore, SS and Wang, Z 2011b. Genetic parameters and genotype x environment interaction for feed efficiency traits in steers fed grower and finisher diets. Journal of Animal Science 89, 3394–3400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durunna, ON, Wang, Z, Basarab, JA, Okine, EK and Moore, SS 2011a. Phenotypic and genetic relationships among feeding behavior traits, feed intake, and residual feed intake in steers fed grower and finisher diets. Journal of Animal Science 89, 3401–3409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
François, D, Bibé, B, Bouix, J, Brunel, JC, Weisbecker, J-L and Ricard, E 2002. Genetic Parameters of Feeding Traits in Meat Sheep. In Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 19–23 August 2002, Montpellier, France, pp. 233–236.Google Scholar
Gilbert, H, Billon, Y, Brossard, L, Faure, J, Gatellier, P, Gondret, F, Labussière, E, Lebret, B, Lefaucheur, L, Le Floch, N, Louveau, I, Merlot, E, Meunier-Salaün, MC, Montagne, L, Mormede, P, Renaudeau, D, Riquet, J, Rogel-Gaillard, C, van Milgen, J, Vincent, A and Noblet, J 2017. Review: Divergent selection for residual feed intake in the growing pig. Animal 11, 1427–1439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilmour, AR, Gogel, BJ, Cullis, BR, Thompson, R and Butler, D 2009. ASReml user guide release 3.0. VSN Int. Ltd Hemel Hempstead UK.Google Scholar
Gunsett, FC 1984. Linear Index Selection to improve traits defined as ratios. Journal of Animal Science 59, 1185–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herd, RM, Velazco, JI, Smith, H, Arthur, PF, Hine, B, Oddy, H, Dobos, RC and Hegarty, RS 2019. Genetic variation in residual feed intake is associated with body composition, behavior, rumen, heat production, hematology, and immune competence traits in Angus cattle. Journal of Animal Science 97, 2202–2219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, PL, Knowler, K, Wing, J, Hickey, S and Johnstone, P 2018. Preliminary estimates of genetic parameters for residual feed intake in New Zealand maternal sheep. In Proceedings of the 11th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 9–12 February 2018, Auckland, New Zealand, 11.608.Google Scholar
Kenny, DA, Fitzsimons, C, Waters, SM and McGee, M 2018. Invited review: improving feed efficiency of beef cattle – the current state of the art and future challenges. Animal 12, 1815–1826.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knott, SA, Cummins, LJ, Dunshea, FR and Leury, BJ 2008. The use of different models for the estimation of residual feed intake (RFI) as a measure of feed efficiency in meat sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 143, 242–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, RM, Swiger, LA, Chambers, D and Gregory, KE 1963. Efficiency of feed use in Beef Cattle1. Journal of Animal Science 22, 486–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labroue, F, Guéblez, R, Sellier, P and Meunier-Salaün, MC 1994. Feeding behaviour of group-housed large white and landrace pigs in French central test stations. Livestock Production Science 40, 303–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mao, F, Chen, L, Vinsky, M, Okine, E, Wang, Z, Basarab, J, Crews, DH Jr and Li, C 2013. Phenotypic and genetic relationships for feed efficiency with growth performance, ultrasound, and carcass merit traits in Angus and Charolais steers. Journal of Animal Science 91, 2067–2076.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marie᾿Etancelin, C, Francois, D, Weisbecker, JL, Marcon, D, Moreno-Romieux, C, Bouvier, F and Tortereau, F 2019. Detailed genetic analysis of feeding behaviour in Romane lambs and links with residual feed intake. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 136, 174–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paganoni, B, Rose, G, Macleay, C, Jones, C, Brown, DJ, Kearney, G, Ferguson, M and Thompson, AN 2017. More feed efficient sheep produce less methane and carbon dioxide when eating high-quality pellets. Journal of Animal Science 95, 3839–3850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perret, G, Bouix, J, Poivey, JP, Bonnet, JN and Bibé, B 1994. Contribution du contrôle individuel des jeunes béliers pour l’amélioration des aptitudes bouchères. In Rencontres Recherches Ruminants, 1–2 December 1994, Paris, France, pp. 187–192.Google Scholar
Redden, RR, Surber, LMM, Grove, AV and Kott, RW 2013. Growth efficiency of ewe lambs classified into residual feed intake groups and pen fed a restricted amount of feed. Small Ruminant Research 114, 214–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redden, RR, Surber, LMM, Roeder, BL, Nichols, BM, Paterson, JA and Kott, RW 2011. Residual feed efficiency established in a post-weaning growth test may not result in more efficient ewes on the range. Small Ruminant Research 96, 155–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snowder, GD and Van Vleck, LD 2003. Estimates of genetic parameters and selection strategies to improve the economic efficiency of postweaning growth in lambs. Journal of Animal Science 81, 2704–2713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thallman, RM, Kuehn, LA, Snelling, WM, Retallick, KJ, Bormann, JM, Freetly, HC, Hales, KE, Bennett, GL, Weaber, RL, Moser, DW and MacNeil, MD 2018. Reducing the period of data collection for intake and gain to improve response to selection for feed efficiency in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 96, 854–866.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, X, Wang, W, Mo, F, La, Y, Li, C and Li, F 2017. Association of residual feed intake with growth and slaughtering performance, blood metabolism, and body composition in growing lambs. Scientific Reports 7, 12681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed