Body Composition of Mice Selected for Rapid Growth Rate

Biondini, Patricia E.; Sutherland, T. M.; Haverland, L. H.

doi:10.2527/jas1968.2715

Cited by 30 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The differences in fatness between SF and CF at 91 days and probably therefore at maturity were very marked. This agrees with the majority of other studies, in which selection for postweaning growth rate or body weight has resulted in a correlated increase in fatness at a given age after weaning, (Hull, 1960;Biondini, Sutherland & Haverland, 1968;Timon, Eisen & Leatherwood, 1970;Hayes & McCarthy, 1976;McPhee & Neill, 1976). The C-strain studied by Fowler (1958), and the high line of Lang & Legates (1968) showed no such increase, although the practice of looking at body composition at only one age is dangerous (Hayes & McCarthy, 1976), and does not allow examination of developmental changes brought about by selection.…”

Section: Discussion (I) Comparison Of the Linessupporting

confidence: 90%

Growth, efficiency and body composition of mice selected for post-weaning weight gain onad libitumor restricted feeding

Hetzel

Nicholas

1986

Genet. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After seven generations of selection, a line of mice selected for post-weaning (21-42 days) weight gain on full feeding (SF) showed significant increases of 49% in weight gain, 31% in efficiency and 14% in food intake, when compared with its control on full feeding between 21 and 42 days. After day 42, SF mice continued to eat more food and were 28% heavier than control mice at 91 days. Because SF mice were heavier than control mice at almost all ages, they were fatter on an age basis. There was, however, no change in the rate of deposition of fat, protein and ash relative to body weight. On restricted feeding between 21 and 42 days, SF mice showed a non-significant increase in weight gain, and hence in efficiency, of 12%. They deposited more fat than control mice during the feeding period but there was no significant difference when comparisons were made on a weight basis.A contemporary line of mice selected for post-weaning (21-42 days) weight gain on restricted feeding (SR) had significant increases of 12% in weight gain, 17% in efficiency but no significant change in food intake, when compared with its control on full feeding between 21 and 42 days. SR mice were the same weight as control mice at all ages except day 21, when they were significantly lighter due to direct genetic effects rather than maternal effects. SR mice had a lower (P<010) rate of fat deposition per unit body weight and became less fat relative to their control as body weight increased. The rate of deposition of other components was not altered by selection. On restricted feeding, SR had a significant increase in weight gain, and hence in efficiency, of 37%. Changes in body composition were similar to those on full feeding.It was concluded that the use of a restricted feeding regime had enabled the exploitation of heritable variation in the partitioning of energy for growth. This variation was independent of genetic variation for appetite and body weight.Overall performance at each level of feeding was best improved by selection on that feeding level. The realized genetic correlation between post-weaning weight gain on full and restricted feeding was estimated to be 0-28 + 008, indicating a very different genetic basis for the same character in the two feeding environments.

show abstract

Section: Discussion (I) Comparison Of the Linessupporting

confidence: 90%

Growth, efficiency and body composition of mice selected for post-weaning weight gain onad libitumor restricted feeding

Hetzel

Nicholas

1986

Genet. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A possible explanation is that mice in litters which, because of poor maternal care or nutrition, were of low weight at 4 weeks of age, would compensate and achieve higher 6WWs with relatively low food intake as maintenance rather than gain accounts for most of the energy utilized. A more detailed investigation would require a multivariate analysis of 4 and 6WWs, food intake and body composition, for it is notable that the high lines in the present experiment were leaner than the low lines (Hastings & Hill, 1989), in contrast to lines selected for high food intake without adjustment for weights which became fatter (Biondini et al 1968). Such multivariate analyses require heavy computations to maximize likelihoods with respect to many parameters, but the same principles apply.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Mixed model analysis of a selection experiment for food intake in mice

Meyer

Hill

1991

Genet. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data from 23 generations of mice selected for increased and reduced appetite were analysed by Restricted Maximum Likelihood fitting an animal model with litters as additional random effects. Traits considered were food intake between 4 and 6 weeks of age adjusted for 4-week body weight (AFI), the selection criterion, and body weight at 6 weeks (6WW). Selection was carried out within families. A high and a low selection line and a control were maintained in each of three replicates. Analyses were performed for each replicate separately taking subsets of the data spanning different numbers of generations. Overall estimates of heritabilities were 0-15 for AFI, which agreed well with realized heritability estimates, and 0-42 for 6WW. The litter variance, expressed as a proportion of the phenotypic variance, was 0-21 for both traits, yielding intraclass correlations of full-sibs of 0-29 and 0-42, respectively. Similar results were obtained for variances of each trait using univariate and multivariate analyses. From the latter, estimates of correlations between the two traits were 0-46 for additive genetic, -019 for litter and 0-31 for residual effects, resulting in a phenotypic correlation of 0-23. Analyses of data from generations 2-7, 8-13 and 14-23 separately showed a marked decrease in genetic variance and heritability in later generations for both traits. Heritabilities of AFI, for instance, were 0-24, 010 and 007, respectively. These changes could not be attributed to the effects of inbreeding or of selection in an infinitesimal model and suggested that some change in variance due to change in gene frequency had occurred during the course of the experiment.

show abstract

“…Most reports show that an increase in the proportion of carcass fat, when measured at a given age, is correlated with selection for increased body weight in chickens (Proudman et al, 1970) and in mice (Fowler, 1958;Roberts, 1965;Biondini et al, 1968;Timon et al, 1970;Baker, 1972;Hayes and McCarthy, 1976;Eisen, 1976;McPhee and Neill, 1976;Eisen et al, 1977). This is explicable in that faster-growing lines will have deposited more fat at any age, because fat forms an increasing proportion of the carcass as growth proceeds.…”

Section: Phenotypic Correlations Between Performance and Body Composimentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Contrary to this expectation, selection for improved food conversion efficiency has been shown to increase carcass fat in both rats (Palmer et al, 1946) and mice (Dickerson and Gowen, 1947). Furthermore, selection for increased body weight often increases both food conversion efficiency and carcass fat (Biondini et al, 1968;Proudman et al, 1970;Timon et al, 1970). Both Pym (1971) and Wethli and Wessels (1973) have reported negative phenotypic correlations between FCR and carcass fat in chickens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Most studies with mice have shown that selection for increased body weight increases the proportion of carcass fat at a given age (Fowler, 1958;Roberts, 1965;Biondini et al, 1968;Timon et al, 1970;Baker, 1972;Eisen, 1976;Hayes and McCarthy, 1976;McPhee and Neill, 1976;Eisen et al, 1977). Exceptions have been reported with other lines of mice (Fowler, 1958;Lang and Legates, 1969;Dawson et al, 1972;Eisen et al, 1977) and rats (Baker and Chapman, 1975) and the possible reasons for this discrepancy have been discussed by Eisen (1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selection for food conversion in broilers: Body composition of birds selected for increased body‐weight gain, food consumption and food conversion ratio

Pym

Solvyns

1979

British Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Body composition was determined in 9-week-old chickens sampled from four lines selected either for increased body-weight gain (line W), for increased food consumption (line F), for decreased food conversion ratio (line E), or at random (line C), after three, four and five generations of selection.2. After five generations of selection the proportions of carcass water (678 g/kg) and protein (187 g/kg) were highest in line E and lowest (636, 180 g/kg respectively) in line F. The proportion of fat was lowest (83 g/kg) in line E and highest (134 g/kg) in line F.3. Lines W and C were similar and intermediate to lines E and F for all the carcass constituents.4. There was more fat in females (115 vs 98 g/kg) and less protein (177 vs 190 g/kg) and water (652 vs 665 g/kg) than in males.5. Line differences in carcass composition were not appreciably altered if birds were killed at equal weight rather than equal age.

show abstract

Body Composition of Mice Selected for Rapid Growth Rate

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

Growth, efficiency and body composition of mice selected for post-weaning weight gain onad libitumor restricted feeding

Growth, efficiency and body composition of mice selected for post-weaning weight gain onad libitumor restricted feeding

Mixed model analysis of a selection experiment for food intake in mice

Selection for food conversion in broilers: Body composition of birds selected for increased body‐weight gain, food consumption and food conversion ratio

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About