Back
 AS  Vol.9 No.8 , August 2018
Implementation of Breed-Specific Traits for a Local Sheep Breed
Abstract: In recent decades, a considerable number of local breeds have been replaced by high-yielding breeds for reasons of profitability. Many local breeds are now threatened by extinction and the loss of their native genetic diversity. The need to conserve breeds and their genetic diversity has a major importance due to the necessity for genetic change within and between populations. Novel approaches have to be explored and extended to maintain this genetic diversity. The aim of this study was the identification and implementation of breed-specific traits for a small, local sheep breed in northern Germany. The data comprised pedigree information, estimated breeding values (EBVs) of several conventional traits, and phenotypic information from a field experiment for two novel traits: 1) average daily gain under extensive circumstances (ADGE) and 2) ultrasonic measurements of muscle-fat ratio (UMFR). The experimental design included a dataset of 47 progeny from 14 pure-bred rams of German White-Headed Mutton (GWM). The methodical approach was divided into four parts: 1) the analysis of the breeding programme, 2) the identification of breed-specific traits, 3) the estimation and correlation of novel breeding values, and 4) the consequences of implementing these novel traits. Genetic parameters and correlations were conducted by applying linear mixed models. The estimates for the heritability (repeatability) were between 0.70 and 0.83 (0.42 and 0.46). The genetic correlation was positive (0.61) and in accordance with the phenotypic correlation (0.62). Average daily gain under intensive circumstances (ADGI) was moderately positive correlated with muscularity (0.60), as opposed to ADGE, which was moderately negative correlated with muscularity (-0.68). The EBV of ADGE was also moderately positive correlated with UMFR (0.64). Genetic response for ADGE enhanced to values of 481.09 g/day, 639.97 g/day, >700 g/day and >850 g/day for different selection intensity scenarios. Corresponding rates of inbreeding were 1.4%, 2.7%, 5.1%, and 7.9% after 10 years of selection. Genetic response for UMFR increased to 0.92, 1.34, 2.41, and >2.75, whereas remaining rates of inbreeding increased to 1.1%, 2.2%, 5.1%, and 7.9%. ADGI and ADGE were tendentially negatively correlated (-0.11), which strengthen the assumption of a biased ADGI. ADGE has a positive influence on meat-quality aspects (UMFR). Optimal use of reference sires with predefined selection intensity achieves genetic response for ADGE and UMFR with simultaneously acceptable rates of inbreeding.
Cite this paper: Schäler, J. , Thaller, G. and Hinrichs, D. (2018) Implementation of Breed-Specific Traits for a Local Sheep Breed. Agricultural Sciences, 9, 958-973. doi: 10.4236/as.2018.98067.
References

[1]   Groeneveld, L.F., Lenstra, J.A., Eding, H., Toro, M.A., Scherf, B., Pilling, D., Negrini, R., Finlay, E.K., Jianlin, H., Groeneveld, E., Weigend, S. and The GLOBALDIV Consortium (2010) Genetic Diversity in Farm Animals—A Review. Animal Genetics, 41, 6-31.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2010.02038.x

[2]   Wang, Y., Bennewitz, J. and Wellmann, R. (2017) Novel Optimum Contribution Selection Methods Accounting for Conflicting Objectives in Breeding Programs for Livestock Breeds with Historical Migration. Genetics Selection Evolution, 49, 45.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-017-0320-7

[3]   Meuwissen, T.H.E. (2009) Genetic Management of Small Populations: A Review. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A—Animal Science, 59 71-79.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09064700903118148

[4]   FAO (2007) The State of the World’s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Rome.
www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1250e/a1250e00.html

[5]   FAO (2010) Breeding Strategies for Sustainable Management of Animal Genetic Resources. FAO Animal Production and Health Guidelines, No. 3, Rome.

[6]   Fernández, J., Meuwissen, T.H.E., Toro, M.A. and Mäki-Tanila, A. (2011) Management of Genetic Diversity in Small Farm Animal Populations. Animal, 5, 1684-1698.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731111000930

[7]   Boettcher, P.J., Tixier-Boichard, M., Toro, M.A., Simianer, H., Eding, H., Gandini, G., Joost, S., Garcia, D., Colli, L., Ajmone-Marsan, P. and The GLOBALDIV Consortium (2010) Objectives, Criteria and Methods for Using Molecular Genetic Data in Priority Setting for Conservation of Animal Genetic Resources. Animal Genetics, 41, 64-77.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2010.02050.x

[8]   Meuwissen, T.H.E. (1997) Maximizing the Response of Selection with a Predefined Rate of Inbreeding. Journal of Animal Science, 75, 934-940.
https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.754934x

[9]   Wellmann, R., Hartwig, S. and Bennewitz, J. (2012) Optimum Contribution Selection for Conserved Populations with Historic Migration. Genetics Selection Evolution, 44, 34.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-44-34

[10]   Sonesson, A.K., Goddard, M.E. and Meuwissen, T.H.E. (2002) The Use of Frozen Semen to Minimize Inbreeding in Small Populations. Genetical Research, 80, 27-30.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672302005712

[11]   Shepherd, R.K. and Woolliams, J.A. (2004) Minimising Inbreeding in Small Populations by Rotational Mating with Frozen Semen. Genetics Research, 84, 87-93.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672304007062

[12]   Colleau, J.J. and Avon, L. (2008) Sustainable Long-Term Conservation of Rare Cattle Breeds Using Rotational AI Sires. Genetics Selection Evolution, 40, 415-432.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-40-4-415

[13]   Hospital, F. (2005) Selection in Backcross Programmes. Transactions of the Royal Society B—Biological Sciences, 360, 1503-1511.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1670

[14]   Odegard, J., Yazdi, M.H., Sonesson, A.K. and Meuwissen, T.H.E. (2009) Incorporating Desirable Genetic Characteristics from an Inferior into a Superior Population Using Genomic Selection. Genetics, 181, 737-745.
https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.108.098160

[15]   Putman, R.J. (1995) Ethical Considerations and Animal Welfare in Ecological Field Studies. Biodiversity and Conservation, 4, 903-915.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00056197

[16]   Wellmann, R. (2018) Optimum Contribution Selection and Population Genetics.
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/optiSel/optiSel.pdf

[17]   Lewis, R.M. and Simm, G. (2000) Selection Strategies in Sire Referencing Schemes in Sheep. Livestock Production Science, 67, 129-141.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(00)00182-2

[18]   Butler, D.G., Cullis, B.R., Gilmour, A.R. and Gogel, B.J. (2009) ASReml-R Reference Manual. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.

[19]   Brien, C. (2016) asremlPlus: Augments the Use of “ASReml-R” in Fitting Mixed Models. R Package Version 2.0-12.
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/asremlPlus/asremlPlus.pdf

[20]   Lessells, C.M. and Boag, P.T. (1987) Unrepeatable Repeatabilities: A Common Mistake. Auk, 104, 116-121.
https://doi.org/10.2307/4087240

[21]   Falconer, D.S. and Mackay, T.F.C. (1996) Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Longman House, Essex.

[22]   R Core Team (2018) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
https://www.R-project.org

[23]   Rendel, J.M. and Robertson, A. (1950) Estimation of Genetic Gain in Milk Yield by Selection in a Closed Herd of Diary Cattle. Journal of Genetics, 50, 1-8.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02986789

[24]   Dohm, M.R. (2002) Repeatability Estimates Do Not Always Set an Upper Limit to Heritability. Functional Ecology, 16, 273-280.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00621.x

[25]   María, G.A., Boldman, K.G. and Van Vleck, L.D. (1993) Estimates of Variances Due to Direct and Maternal Effects for Growth Traits of Romanov Sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 71, 845-849.
https://doi.org/10.2527/1993.714845x

[26]   Hassen, Y., Fuerst-Waltl, B. and Sölkner, S. (2003) Genetic Parameter Estimates for Birth Weight, Weaning Weight and Average Daily Gain in Pure and Crossbred Sheep in Ethiopia. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 120, 29-38.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0388.2003.00361.x

[27]   Gowane, G.R., Prince, L.L.L., Lopes, F.B., Paswan, C. and Sharma, R.C. (2015) Genetic and Phenotypic Parameter Estimates of Live Weight and Daily Gain Traits in Malpura Sheep Using Bayesian Approach. Small Ruminant Research, 128, 10-18.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.04.016

[28]   Gilmour, A.R., Luff, A.F., Fogarty, N.M. and Banks, R. (1994) Genetic Parameters for Ultrasound Fat Depth and Eye Muscle Measurements in Live Poll Dorset Sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 45, 1281-1291.
https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9941281

[29]   Larsgard, A.G. and Olesen, I. (1998) Genetic Parameters for Direct and Maternal Effects on Weights and Ultrasonic Muscle and Fat Depth of Lambs. Livestock Production Science, 55, 273-278.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(98)00134-1

[30]   Safari, E., Fogarty, N.M. and Gilmour, A.R. (2005) A Review of Genetic Parameter estimates for Wool, Growth, Meat and Reproduction Traits in Sheep. Livestock Production Science, 92, 271-289.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.09.003

[31]   Gandini, G. and Oldenbroek, K. (2007) Strategies for Moving from Conservation to Utilisation. In: Oldenbroek, K., Ed., Utilisation and Conservation of Farm Animal Genetic Resources, Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, 29-54.

[32]   Toro, M.A., Silió, L. and Woolliams, J.A. (1990) Selection for Lean Meat Production in Sheep: A Simulation Study. Proceedings 4th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Vol. 15, Edinburgh, 23-27 July 1990, 96-99.

[33]   Villanueva, B., Simm, G. and Woolliams, J.A. (1995) Genetic Progress and Inbreeding for Alternative Nucleus Schemes for Beef Cattle. Animal Science, 61, 231-239.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1357729800013758

[34]   Villanueva, B., Bijma, P. and Woolliams, J.A. (2000) Optimal Mass Selection Policies for Schemes with Overlapping Generations and Restricted Inbreeding. Genetics Selection Evolution, 32, 339-355.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-32-4-339

[35]   Meuwissen, T.H.E. and Sonesson, A.K. (2004) Genotype-Assisted Optimum Contribution Selection to Maximize Selection Response over a Specified Time Period. Genetics Research, 84, 109-116.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672304007050

[36]   Nielsen, H.M., Sonesson, A.K. and Meuwissen, T.H.E. (2014) Optimum Contribution Selection Using Traditional Best Linear Unbiased Prediction and Genomic Breeding Values in Aquaculture Breeding Schemes. Journal of Animal Science, 89, 630-638.
https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2731

 
 
Top