Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-l72pf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-08T07:46:43.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic parameters of growth, ultrasonic tissue depths and slaughter traits for sheep reared in a hill environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

B T Wolf ,
B M L Mclean  and
O D Davies
B T Wolf*
Affiliation:
Institute of Rural Sciences, University of Wales Aberystwyth, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, SY23 3AL, United Kingdom
B M L Mclean
Affiliation:
ADAS Pwllpeiran, Cwmystwyth, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, SY23 4AB, United Kingdom
O D Davies
Affiliation:
ADAS Pwllpeiran, Cwmystwyth, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, SY23 4AB, United Kingdom
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access

Extract

The construction of selection indices for sheep improvement programmes requires reliable estimates of the genetic and phenotypic correlations among traits in the selection objective and the criteria on which selection is based. Parameter estimates for growth, ultrasonic predictors of body composition and slaughter traits are scarce for sheep reared in a hill environment in comparison to the information available for terminal sire breeds (Conington et al., 1998). The aim of this study was to estimate the genetic parameters of growth and carcass characteristics of lambs reared in a hill environment when slaughtered at a constant level of finish.

Type
Poster presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2006 , March 2006 , pp. 96
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 The American Society of International Law

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

Conington, J., Bishop, S. C., Waterhouse, A. and Simm, G. 1998. A comparison of growth and carcass traits in Scottish Blackface lambs sired by genetically lean or fat rams. Animal Science 67: 299–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar