Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-qxsvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T11:41:54.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selection for rate and efficiency of lean gain in Hereford cattle. 2. Evaluation of correlated responses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. A. Mrode ,
C. Smith  and
R. Thompson
R. A. Mrode
Affiliation:
ARFC Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
C. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
R. Thompson
Affiliation:
ARFC Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
Get access

Abstract

Correlated responses in two lines of Hereford cattle selected for lean growth rate (LGR) from birth to 400 days of age and lean food conversion ratio (LFCR) from 200 to 400 days of age for a period of 8 years were evaluated. Correlated changes were estimated by two methods: deviation of selected lines from a control line and restricted maximum likelihood. Generally, estimates from the two methods were similar but tended to be more precise for the latter. Statistically significant correlated responses occurred in growth rate in the LGR line and in lean proportion and food conversion ratio in both selected lines. Selection for LGR was accompanied by increases in body weight at various ages in both male and female progeny. In the LFCR line there were little or no changes in body weight for male calves but some increases at certain ages for female progeny. There were no adverse correlated responses detected in reproductive traits such as calving difficulty and calving and pre-weaning mortality.

Keywords

beef cattlebody lean massselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , August 1990 , pp. 35 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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

REFERENCES

Aaron, D. L., Frahm, R. R. and Buchanan, D. S. 1986. Direct and correlated responses for increased weaning or yearling weight in Angus cattle. II Evaluation of response. Journal of Animal Science 62: 66–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, B. B., Fredeen, H. T. and Weiss, G. M. 1974. Correlated responses in birth weight, growth rate and carcass merit under single trait selection for yearling weight in beef Shorthorn cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 14: 117–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barlow, R. 1984. Selection for growth and size in ruminants. Is it time for a moratorium? Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Sheep and Beef Cattle Breeding, Pretoria, South Africa, pp. 421–432.Google Scholar
Brinks, J. S., Olson, J. E. and Carroll, E. J. 1973. Calving difficulty and its association with subsequent productivity in Herefords. Journal of Animal Science 360: 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevraux, D. J. and Bailey, C. M. 1977. Selection for postweaning growth rate in closed line of Hereford cattle. Journal of Animal Science 44: 352–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, A. V. and Bayntun, J. A. 1987. ABRO/ADAS Hereford crossbreeding trial, 1986-1987. Interim report of evaluations carried out at the Institute of Food Research, Bristol Laboratory.Google Scholar
Fowler, V. R., Bichard, M. and Pease, A. 1976. Objectives in pig breeding. Animal Production 23: 365–387.Google Scholar
Frahm, R. R., Nicols, G. G. and Buchanan, D. S. 1985. Selection for increased weaning or yearling weight in Hereford cattle. Journal of Animal Science 60: 1385–1395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallagher, R. M. 1964. The influence of growth rate selection on some carcass characteristics of beef cattle. Animal Breeding Abstracts 33: 370.Google Scholar
Harvey, W. R. 1977. User's Guide for LSML76. Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Martin, T. G. and Alenda, R. 1980. Genetic trend in a herd of Angus cattle selected for 365-day weight over 21 years. Proceedings of the 1st World Congress on Sheep and Beef Cattle Breeding, Vol. 1, pp. 249–251.Google Scholar
Menissier, F. 1975. Calving difficulty in French beef breeds: analysis of components and breeding improvement. In Optimum Breeding Plans for Beef Cattle. Bulletin Technique, Department de Genetique Animate (INRA) No. 21, pp. 60–102.Google Scholar
Morris, C. A., Bennett, G. L., Baker, R. L. and Carter, A. H. 1986. Birth weight, dystocia and calf mortality in some New Zealand and beef breeding herds. Journal of Animal Science 62: 327–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mrode, R. A. 1988. Genetic response to selection for rate and efficiency of lean gain in beef cattle. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Mrode, R. A., Smith, C. and Thompson, R. 1990. Selection for rate and efficiency of lean gains in Hereford cattle. 1. Selection pressure applied and direct responses. Animal Production 51: 23–34.Google Scholar
Newman, J. A., Rahnefeld, G. W. and Fredeen, H. T. 1973. Selection intensity and response to selection for yearling weight in beef cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 53: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Notter, D. R., Dickerson, G. E. and De shazer, J. A. C. 1976. Selection for rate and efficiency of lean gain in rats. Genetics 84: 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pacer, I. U., Raxook, A. G., Troro, J. B. F., Bonilha, C. M., Flgueiredo, C. A., Nascimento, J., Pacola, I., Candido, J. G., Campos, B. E. S. and MacHado, W. B. 1986. Selection for yearly weight in Netore and Guzera Zebu breeds. Selection applied and response. Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Lincoln, Nebraska. Vol. IX, Breeding Programmes for Dairy and Beef Cattle, Water Buffalo, Sheep and Goats, pp. 419–423.Google Scholar
Pattie, W. A. 1965. Selection for weaning weight in Merino sheep. 1. Direct response to selection. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 5: 353–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simm, G. 1983. Selection of beef cattle for efficiency of lean growth. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Simm, G., Smith, C. and Prescott, J. H. D. 1983. Selecting beef cattle for lean growth and efficiency. Animal Production 36: 505–506 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Smith, C. 1967. A note on the improvement of a trait by selecting on its components. Animal Production 9: 127–130.Google Scholar
Tong, A. K. W., Newman, J. A., Rahnefeld, G. W. and Lawson, J. E. 1988. The relationship of sire evaluations for ease of calving and birth weight. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68: 557–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar