Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T04:55:38.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Progeny Testing in the Breeding of Farm Animals*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2016

Ivar Johansson  and
Alan Robertson
Ivar Johansson
Affiliation:
Royal Agricultural College of Sweden, Uppsala
Alan Robertson
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh
Get access

Extract

The progress in animal improvement depends on the accuracy with which the breeding value of each individual in the breed, or herd, is estimated, and how the animals chosen on the basis of our estimates are combined in matings. We are concerned here only with the first part of the problem, i.e. the estimation of breeding values. The estimates are made in regard to certain characters, or traits, which are of particular interest from an economic point of view, and they may be based on the phenotypic merit of the individual, or on the merits of its ancestors or collateral relatives, or on the merits of its progeny, in regard to the character in question. Often a combination of two, or three, or all four methods may be used. Their relative importance depends on the heritability of the character, as will be discussed later.

Type
Progeny Testing
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production , Volume 1953 , Issue 1 , 1952 , pp. 79 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1952

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.)

Footnotes

*

Reprinted (with modifications) from European Association for Animal Production, Publication No. 2, 1952, pp. 9-32.

References

Literature Cited

Chapman, A. B. & Lush, J. L. 1932. Twinning, sex ratios, and genetic variability in birth weight in sheep. J. Heredity, 23: 473–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S., & Latyszewski, M. 1952. The environment in relation to selection for size in mice. J. Genetics, 51: 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, I. & Hansson, A. 1940. Causes of variation in milk and butterfat yield of dairy cows. Lantbr. akad. tidskr, 6 1/2: 1–127.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. & Hansson, A. 1943. The sex ratio and multiple births in sheep. Annals of the Agr. Coll. of Sweden, 11: 145–171.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. 1949. Production traits in dairy cattle and their improvement by selection. Ve. Congrès internationale de zootechnie. Special papers: 273–279.Google Scholar
Johansson, I. & Korkman, N. 1950. A study of the variation in production traits of bacon pigs. Acta Agr. Scand., 1: 62–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korkman, N. 1947. Causes of variation in size and weight of litters from sows. Acta Agr. Suec, 2: 253–310.Google Scholar
Mahadevan, P. 1951. The effect of environment and heredity on lactation. J. Agr. Science, 41: 80–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knapp, B. & Clark, R. T. 1950. Revised estimates of heritability of economic characteristics in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 9: 582–587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patow, C. V., 1930. Weitere Studien über die Vererbung der Milchleistung beim Rinde. Ztschr. f. Zuchtung, 17: 3–159.Google Scholar
Rice, V. A. 1944. A new method for indexing dairy bulls. J. Dairy Sci., 27: 921–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. & Rendel, J. M. 1950. The use of progeny testing with artificial insemination in dairy cattle. J. Genetics, 50: 21–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Terrill, C. M. & Hazel, L. N. 1943. Heritability of yearling fleece and body traits of range Rambouillet ewes. J. Anim. Sci. 2: 358–359.Google Scholar
Tyler, W. J. & Jr.Hyatt, G. 1947. The heritability of milk and butterfat production and percentage of butterfat in Ayrshire cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 6. 479–480.Google ScholarPubMed
Ward, A. H. 1945. Sire survey work in New Zealand. New Zealand Dairy Board Survey and Merit Register, 2nd ed.: 3–23.Google Scholar