[en] The aim of this study was to develop a new genetic evaluation model to estimate the genetic merit of boars for growth based on 1) performance of their crossbred progeny fattened in the test station and 2) their own performance or those of relatives from the on-farm testing system. The model was a bivariate random regression animal model with linear splines and was applied to Piétrain boars from the Walloon Region of Belgium mated with Landrace sows. Data contained 1) 12,610 BW records from the test station collected on 1,435 crossbred pigs from Piétrain boars and Landrace sows, and 2) 52,993 BW records from the on-farm testing system collected on 50,670 pigs with a breed composition of at least 40% Piétrain or Landrace. Since 2007, 56 Piétrain boars have been tested in the station. Data used to estimate variance components and breeding values were standardized for the age to take into account heterogeneity of variances and then pre-adjusted at 210 d of age to put all records on the same scale. Body weight records from the test station and from the on-farm testing system were considered as 2 different traits. The heterosis effect was modeled as fixed regression on the heterozygosity coefficient. As all test station animals were similarly crossbred, smaller variation in heterozygosity caused the sampling error of the regression estimate at 210 d to be larger in the test station than in on-farm data with estimates of 28.35 ± 14.55 kg and 9.02 ± 0.67 kg, respectively. Therefore, the most likely reason for the large differences in estimates was sampling. Heritability estimates ranged from 0.37 to 0.60 at 210 and 75 d, respectively, for test station BW and from 0.42 to 0.60 at 210 d and 175 d, respectively, for on-farm BW. Genetic correlation decreased when the age interval between records increased, and were greater between ages for test station than for on-farm data. Genetic correlations between test station and on-farm BW at the same age were high: 0.90 at 175 d and
0.85 at 210 d. For the 56 boars tested in the station, the average reliability of their EBV for ADG between 100 and 210 d was improved from 0.60 using only test station data to 0.69 using jointly test station and on-farm data. Based on these results, the new model developed was considered as a good method of detection of differences in growth potential of Piétrain boars based on test station and on-farm data.
Disciplines :
Animal production & animal husbandry Genetics & genetic processes
Author, co-author :
Dufrasne, Marie ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Sciences agronomiques > Zootechnie
Rustin, Maité
Jaspart, Véronique; Association Wallonne des Eleveurs de Porcs
Wavreille, José; Centre Wallon de Recherches agronomiques > Production et Filières > Mode d'élevage, bein-être et qualité
Gengler, Nicolas ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Sciences agronomiques > Zootechnie
Language :
English
Title :
Using test station and on-farm data for the genetic evaluation of Piétrain boars used on Landrace sows for growth performance
Publication date :
2011
Journal title :
Journal of Animal Science
ISSN :
0021-8812
eISSN :
1525-3163
Publisher :
American Society of Animal Science, Champaign, United States - Illinois
Bidanel, J. P., and A. Ducos. 1995. Variabilité et évolution génétique des caractères measurés dans les stations publiques de contrôle des performances chez les porcs de race Piétrain. Journées Rech. Porcine en France 27:149-154.
Bidanel, J. P., and A. Ducos. 1996. Genetic correlations between test station and on-farm performance traits in Large White and French Landrace pig breeds. Livest. Prod. Sci. 45:55-62.
Bohmanova, J., I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 2005. Studies on multitrait and random regression models for genetic evaluation of beef cattle for growth. J. Anim. Sci. 83:62-67.
Cole, J. B., and P. M. VanRaden. 2010. Net merit as a measure of lifetime profit: 2010 revision. AIPL Research Report NM$4 (12-09). Accessed May 31, 2011. http://www.aipl.arsusda.gov/reference/nmcalc.htm.
Dekkers, J. C. M. 2007. Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance. J. Anim. Sci. 85:2104-2114.
Edwards, D. B., R. J. Tempelman, and R. O. Bates. 2006. Evaluation of Duroc- vs. Pietrain-sired pigs for growth and composition. J. Anim. Sci. 84:266-275.
Habier, D., K.-U. Götz, and L. Dempfle. 2007. Estimation of genetic parameters on test stations using purebred and crossbred progeny of sires in the Bavarian Piétrain. Livest. Sci. 107:142-151.
Haraldsen, M., J. Ødegård, D. Olsen, O. Vangen, I. M. A. Ranberg, and T. H. E. Meuwissen. 2009. Prediction of genetic growth curves in pigs. Animal 3:475-481.
Huisman, A. E., R. F. Veerkamp, and J. A. van Arendonk. 2002. Genetic parameters for various random regression models to describe the weight data of pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 80:575-582.
Iwaisaki, H., S. Tsuruta, I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 2005. Genetic parameters with multitrait and linear spline-random regression models using Gelbvieh early growth data. J. Anim. Sci. 83:757-763.
Jaffrezic, F., I. M. S. White, R. Thompson, and W. G. Hill. 2000. A link function approach to model heterogeneity of residual variances over time in lactation curve analyses. J. Dairy Sci. 83:1089-1093.
Jamrozik, J., J. Bohmanova, and L. R. Schaeffer. 2010. Selection of locations of knots for linear splines in random regression test-day models. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 127:87-92.
Jamrozik, J., L. R. Schaeffer, and G. B. Jansen. 2000. Approximate accuracies of prediction from random regression models. Liv-est. Prod. Sci. 66:85-92.
Kachman, S. D., and R. W. Everett. 1993. A multiplicative mixed model when the variances are heterogeneous. J. Dairy Sci. 76:859-867.
Kettunen, A., E. A. Mäntysaari, and J. Pösö. 2000. Estimation of genetic parameters for daily milk yield of primiparous Ayrshire cows by random regression test-day models. Livest. Prod. Sci. 66:251-261.
Legarra, A., I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 2004. Constructing co-variance functions for random regression models for growth in Gelbvieh beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 82:1564-1571.
Lutaaya, E., I. Misztal, J. W. Mabry, T. Short, H. H. Timm, and R. Holzbauer. 2001. Genetic parameters estimates from joint evaluation of purebreds and crossbreds in swine using crossbred model. J. Anim. Sci. 79:3002-3007.
Meuwissen, T. H. E., G. De Jong, and B. Engel. 1996. Joint estimation of breeding values and heterogeneous variances of large data files. J. Dairy Sci. 79:310-316.
Misztal, I. 2006. Properties of random regression models using linear splines. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 123:74-80.
Misztal, I. 2011. BLUPF90 family of programs. University of Georgia. Accessed May 3, 2011. http://nce.ads.uga.edu/~ignacy/newprograms.html.
Peškovičová, D., J. Wolk, E. Groeneveld, and M. Wolfová. 2002. Simultaneous estimation of covariance structure of traits from field test, station test and litter recording in pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci. 77:155-165.
Pool, M. H., L. L. G. Janss, and T. H. E. Meuwissen. 2000. Genetic parameters of Legendre polynomials for first parity lactation curves. J. Dairy Sci. 83:2640-2649.
Robbins, K. R., I. Misztal, and J. K. Bertrand. 2005. A practical longitudinal model for evaluating growth in Gelbvieh cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 83:29-33.
Schaeffer, L. R. 2004. Application of random regression models in animal breeding. Livest. Prod. Sci. 86:35-45.
Schneider, J. F., L. L. Christian, and D. L. Kuhlers. 1982. Crossbreeding in swine: Genetic effects on pig growth and carcass merit. J. Anim. Sci. 54:747-756.
Tosh, J. J., and J. W. Wilton. 1994. Effects of data structure on variance of prediction error and accuracy of genetic evaluation. J. Anim. Sci. 72:2568-2577.
Wiggans, G. R., and P. M. VanRaden. 1991. Method and effect of adjustment for heterogeneous variance. J. Dairy Sci. 74:4350- 4357.
Zumbach, B., I. Misztal, S. Tsuruta, J. Holl, W. Herring, and T. Long. 2007. Genetic correlation between two strains of Du-rocs and crossbreds from differing production environments for slaughter traits. J. Anim. Sci. 85:901-908.