Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T09:24:26.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Analysis of inbreeding, effective population size and inbreeding depression in Iranian native fowls (Mazandaran Province)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2017

A Ghazi Khani Shad*
Affiliation:
Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Islamic Republic of Iran
A Nejati Javaremi
Affiliation:
Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Islamic Republic of Iran
H Mehrabani Yeganeh
Affiliation:
Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Islamic Republic of Iran
Get access

Extract

Mating of related individuals produces an inbred progeny, with an inbreeding coefficient that is one-half the additive relationship between its parents. One of the consequences of inbreeding is reduction of the mean phenotypic value or inbreeding depression, particularly for reproductive and fitness characters. Another consequence of inbreeding is reduction in additive genetic variance within lines or increasing homozygosity and higher risk for the incidence of lethal or deleterious recessive alleles. In recent years many studies show that inbreeding reduces reproduction and fitness capacity, for example Inbreeding depression in reproductive and productive traits has been reported by Flock et al (1993), Smith et al (1998), Klemetsdal (1998), Thompson et al (2000a,b) and Nwagu et al (2007).

The purpose of this study was to investigation recent trends in inbreeding in Iranian Native Fowls and relationship between increase in inbreeding and decreases in economic traits including body weight, age at first egg, egg production and egg weight.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2009

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

Meyer, K., 2001. User notes. Institute of Animal Science, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Nomura, T., Mukai, F. and Yamamoto, A., 2001. Animal Science Journal, 72: 386–394.Google Scholar
Nordskorg, A.W. and Cheng, S., 1998. Poultry Science, 67, 859–864.Google Scholar
Szwaczkowski, T., Cywa-Benko, Katarzyna and Stanislaw, W.. 2003. Animal Science Papers and Reports, 21, 121–129.Google Scholar