Interactions between Genotype and Plane of Nutrition in Selection for Rate of Gain in Swine

Fowler, Stewart H.; Ensminger, Margaret E.

doi:10.2527/jas1960.192434x

Cited by 40 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Little work has been done to determine the effectiveness of selection under different nutritional environments. Fowler and Ensminger (1960) investigated the effect of selection for rate of gain under full and restricted feeding. When plant proteins and other sources of supplemental protein become limited for use in swine diets, it will be necessary to have or develop pigs which can perform acceptably on diets containing less supplemental protein than is presently being used.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gain, Feed Conversion and Carcass Traits of Swine Fed under Two Nutritional Regimes

Cunningham

Socha

Peo

et al. 1973

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gain, Feed Conversion and Carcass Traits of Swine Fed under Two Nutritional Regimes

Cunningham

Socha

Peo

et al. 1973

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This may indicate the existence of an interaction between genotype and feeding regimes for both traits, but this is confounded with sexes. The pooled estimate for genetic correlation between the rate of gain on 2 different planes of nutrition was 0.70 (Fowler and Ensminger 1960). The corresponding value of 0.65 was obtained in the study of Suzuki et al (1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…The genetic correlation of MTDG and MFT in the currently reported study is small and negative (-0.17) as may be expected under restricted feeding. A number of selection experiments have indicated greater correlated response in lean growth rate and carcass lean content under restricted feeding than under ad libitum feeding (Fowler and Ensminger 1960;McPhee et al 1988). This implied that selection with a constraint on the amount of feeding would exploit genetic variances in partitioning of energy toward lean growth and away from fat deposition (McPhee et al 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic parameters and predicted response to selection for lean growth in an Australian commercial nucleus pig herd

Nguyen¹,

McPhee²,

Wade³

et al. 2000

Aust. J. Agric. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic parameters for performance traits in a pig population were estimated using a multi-trait derivative-free REML algorithm. The 2590 total data included 922 restrictively fed male and 1668 ad libitum fed female records. Estimates of heritability (standard error in parentheses) were 0.25 (0.03), 0.15 (0.03), and 0.30 (0.05) for lifetime daily gain, test daily gain, and P2-fat depth in males, respectively; and 0.27 (0.04) and 0.38 (0.05) for average daily gain and P2-fat depth in females, respectively. The genetic correlation between P2-fat depth and test daily gain in males was –0.17 (0.06) and between P2-fat and lifetime average daily gain in females 0.44 (0.09). Genetic correlations between sexes were 0.71 (0.11) for average daily gain and –0.30 (0.10) for P2-fat depth. Genetic response per standard deviation of selection on an index combining all traits was predicted at $AU120 per sow per year. Responses in daily gain and backfat were expected to be higher when using only male selection than when using only female selection. Selection for growth rate in males will improve growth rate and carcass leanness simultaneously.

show abstract

“…Divergent selection lines for lean growth rate with restricted feeding were also included in the experimental design, to complement the lean growth rate selection lines on ad-libitum feeding and to enable subsequent examination of genotype with environment interactions. The Fowler and Ensminger (1960) study provided evidence for a genotype with feeding regime interaction, as pigs selected on restricted feeding had higher growth rates than animals selected on ad-libitum feeding, when tested on both restricted and on ad-libitum feeding regimes. McPhee, Rathmell, Daniels and Cameron (1988) reported results with uni-directional lines of pigs, which were consistent with those of Fowler and Ensminger (1960).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The Fowler and Ensminger (1960) study provided evidence for a genotype with feeding regime interaction, as pigs selected on restricted feeding had higher growth rates than animals selected on ad-libitum feeding, when tested on both restricted and on ad-libitum feeding regimes. McPhee, Rathmell, Daniels and Cameron (1988) reported results with uni-directional lines of pigs, which were consistent with those of Fowler and Ensminger (1960). Responses to selection for lean growth with restricted feeding and with ad-libitum feeding need to be examined to determine the optimal feeding regime for performance test, when the selection objective is increased lean growth with an ad-libitum feeding regime.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs 3. Responses to selection with a restricted feeding regime

1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responses to four generations of divergent selection in pigs for lean growth rate (LGS) with restricted feeding were studied. The selection criterion was designed to obtain equal correlated responses in growth rate and carcass lean content, measured in phenotypic s.d. Animals were to be performance tested in individual pens with a mean starting weight of 30 kg for a period of 84 days. Daily food intake was equal to 0-75 gig of the daily food intake for pigs offered food ad-libitum. In the high, low and control lines, there ivere 1250 Large White-Edinburgh (LW) pigs and 875 British Landrace-Wye (LR) pigs. Each selection line consisted of 10 sires and 20 dams, with a generation interval ofl year. After four generations of selection, cumulative selection differentials were 5-9 and 4-8 phenotypic s.d. for LW and LR populations, with similar responses, 1-8 (s.e. 0-17) phenotypic s.d. Mean weight at the end of test, growth rate and backfat depths at the shoulder, mid back and loin were 89 kg, 712 g/day, 26,13 and 13 mm for LW and for LR pigs were 87 kg, 683 g/day, 28,10 and 10 mm. High line pigs were heavier at the end of test (4-3 (s.e.d. 1-4) kg and 4-0 (s.e.d. 1-6) kg) for LW and LR populations, with corresponding responses in growth rate (54 (s.e.d. 16) g/day and 47 (s.e.d. 18) g/day). Responses in the three backfat depths were -4-1 (s.e.d. 1-2) mm, -2-6 (s.e.d. 0-7) mm and -2-9 (s.e.d. 0-7) mm for LW and -2-2 (s.e.d. 0-05) mm, -2-2 (s.e.d. 0-4) mm and -2-4 (s.e.d. 0-5) mm for LR populations. Responses in weight off test and backfat depths were symmetric about the control lines. Heritabilities for LGS were 0-34 and 0-28 (s.e.d. 0-5) for the LW and LR populations, when estimated by residual maximum likelihood. Common environmental effects for LGS were 0-11 (s.e. 0-03) for LW and 0-17 (s.e. 0-04) for LR. Heritabilities for growth rate and average backfat depth were similar for , as were common environmental effects (0-10 s.e. 0-04). Average phenotypic and genetic correlations between growth rate and backfat, for LW and LR populations, and -0-06 (s.e. 0-16), respectively).Responses to selection and genetic parameter estimates demonstrate that there is substantial genetic variation in growth and fat deposition when pigs are performance tested on restricted feeding.

show abstract

Interactions between Genotype and Plane of Nutrition in Selection for Rate of Gain in Swine

Cited by 40 publications

References 0 publications

Gain, Feed Conversion and Carcass Traits of Swine Fed under Two Nutritional Regimes

Gain, Feed Conversion and Carcass Traits of Swine Fed under Two Nutritional Regimes

Genetic parameters and predicted response to selection for lean growth in an Australian commercial nucleus pig herd

Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs 3. Responses to selection with a restricted feeding regime

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About