Reproductive performance of sows selected for divergent social genetic effects for growth
Joon Ki Hong, Yong Min Kim, Kyu Ho Cho, Jun Chul Park, Deuk Hwan Lee
Abstract
Social genetic effects (SGE) are genetic effects of an individual that affect the phenotype of its social partners. We determined the reproductive consequences of selection for SGE on growth in pigs. To investigate the influence of social genetic effects on growth, gilts were divided into two groups based on their estimated SGE: positive SGE sows (+SGE) and negative SGE sows (-SGE). At the time of selection, gilts were contemporaries and similarly managed. We recorded the reproductive performance of the two groups based on parity until culling. Reproductive performance included the total number of piglets born (TNB), number of piglets born alive (NBA), average piglet birth weight (BW), coefficient of variation for birth weight (CVBW), age at first farrowing (AFF), weaning to estrus interval (WEI), and gestation length (GL). TNB was 0.5 higher for +SGE sows (13.8) than for -SGE sows (P = 0.03, SEM = 0.06), and NBA exhibited a higher tendency in +SGE sows (P = 0.07, SEM = 0.06). Positive SGE for growth was expressed at an earlier AFF (P = 0.04, SEM = 1.10), and shorter WEI (P < 0.01, SEM = 0.08) and GL (P = 0.03, SEM = 0.03). Collectively, the results of this study highlight the opportunities to improve litter size, the age at first farrowing, gestation length, and weaning to estrus interval using SGE.
Keywords
References
Barnett J, Hemsworth P, Cronin G, Jongman E, Hutson G. 2001. A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing. Aust J Agric Res, 52:1-28.
Bergsma R, Kanis E, Knol EF, Bijma P. 2008. The contribution of social effects to heritable variation in finishing traits of domestic pigs (Sus scrofa). Genetics, 178:1559-1570.
Bergsma R, Mathur P, Kanis E, Verstegen M, Knol E, Van Arendonk J. 2013. Genetic correlations between lactation performance and growing-finishing traits in pigs. J Anim Sci, 91:3601-3611.
Bijma P, Muir WM, Van Arendonk JA. 2007. Multilevel selection 1: quantitative genetics of inheritance and response to selection. Genetics, 175:277-288.
Brown JA, Seddon YM. 2014. Groups or stalls: What does science say? Sci. Ethology 1:6.
Bunter K, Lewis C, Newman S. 2015. Social genetic effects influence reproductive performance of grouphoused sows. J Anim Sci, 93:3783-3793.
Camerlink I, Turner SP, Bijma P, Bolhuis JE. 2013. Indirect genetic effects and housing conditions in relation to aggressive behaviour in pigs. PloS one, 8:e65136.
Camerlink I, Ursinus WW, Bijma P, Kemp B, Bolhuis JE. 2015. Indirect genetic effects for growth rate in domestic pigs alter aggressive and manipulative biting behaviour. Behav Genet, 45:117-126.
D'Eath R, Conington J, Lawrence A, Olsson I, Sandøe P. 2010. Breeding for behavioural change in farm animals: practical, economic and ethical considerations. Animal Welfare, 19:17-27.
DeNise R, Irvin K, Swiger L, Plimpton R. 1983. Selection for increased leanness of Yorkshire swine. IV. Indirect responses of the carcass, breeding efficiency and preweaning litter traits. J Anim Sci, 56:551-559.
Ducos A, Bidanel J. 1996. Genetic correlations between production and reproductive traits measured on the farm, in the Large White and French Landrace pig breeds. J Anim Breed Genet, 113:493-504.
Johansson K. 1981. Some notes concerning the genetic possibilities of improving sow fertility. Livest Prod Sci, 8:431-447.
Knauer M, Cassady J, Newcom D, See MT. 2011. Phenotypic and genetic correlations between gilt estrus, puberty, growth, composition, and structural conformation traits with first-litter reproductive measures.
J Anim Sci, 89:935-942. Meyer K. 2007. WOMBAT—A tool for mixed model analyses in quantitative genetics by restricted maximum likelihood (REML). J Zhejiang Univ Sci B, 8:815-821.
Moeller S, Goodwin R, Johnson R, Mabry J, Baas T, Robison O. 2004. The National Pork Producers Council Maternal Line National Genetic Evaluation Program: A comparison of six maternal genetic lines for female productivity measures over four parities. J Anim Sci, 82:41-53.
Moore AJ, Brodie III ED, Wolf JB. 1997. Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process: I. Direct and indirect genetic effects of social interactions. Evolution, 51(5):1352-1362.
Quesnel H, Pasquier A, Mounier A, Prunier A. 1998. Influence of feed restriction during lactation on gonadotropic hormones and ovarian development in primiparous sows. J Anim Sci, 76:856-863.
Reimert I, Rodenburg T, Ursinus W, Duijvesteijn N, Camerlink I, Kemp B, Bolhuis J. 2013. Backtest and novelty behavior of female and castrated male piglets, with diverging social breeding values for growth. J Anim Sci, 91:4589-4597.
Reimert I, Rodenburg TB, Ursinus WW, Kemp B, Bolhuis JE. 2014. Responses to novel situations of female and castrated male pigs with divergent social breeding values and different backtest classifications in barren and straw-enriched housing. Appl Anim Behav Sci, 151:24-35.
Rodenburg T, Bijma P, Ellen E, Bergsma R, De Vries S, Bolhuis J, Kemp B, Van Arendonk J. 2010. Breeding amiable animals? Improving farm animal welfare by including social effects in breeding programmes. Animal Welfare, 19:77-82.
Rydhmer L, Lundeheim N, Johansson K. 1995. Genetic parameters for reproduction traits in sows and relations to performance‐test measurements. J Anim Breed Genet, 112:33-42.
Sargolzaei M, Iwaisaki H, Colleau JJ. 2006. Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production. Belo Horizonte; Brazil: August 13-18. CFC: A tool for monitoring genetic diversity; CD-ROM Communication, pp.27-28.
Serenius, T. 2004. Genetics of sow efficiency in the Finnish Landrace and Large White populations. (PhD Dissertation), University of Helsinki, Finland, Agrifood Research Reports, pp.1-42.
Serenius T, Stalder K. 2004. Genetics of length of productive life and lifetime prolificacy in the Finnish Landrace and Large White pig populations. J Anim Sci, 82:3111-3117.
Serenius T, Stalder K, Fernando R. 2008. Genetic associations of sow longevity with age at first farrowing, number of piglets weaned, and wean to insemination interval in the Finnish Landrace swine population. J Animal Sci, 86:3324-3329.
Sesti L, Britt JH. 1993. Influence of stage of lactation, exogenous luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone, and suckling on estrus, positive feedback of luteinizing hormone, and ovulation in sows treated with estrogen. J Anim Sci, 71:989-998.
Shaw H, Foxcroft G. 1985. Relationships between LH, FSH and prolactin secretion and reproductive activity in the weaned sow. J Reprod Fertil, 75:17-28.
Soede N, Langendijk P, Kemp B. 2011. Reproductive cycles in pigs. Anim Reprod Sci, 124:251-258.
Stalder KJ, Lacy RC, Cross TL, Conatser GE. 2003.̉̉ Financial impact of average parity of culled females in a breed-to-wean swine operation using replacement gilt net present value analysis. J Swine Health Prod, 11:69-74.
Sterning M, Rydhmer L, Eliasson-Selling L. 1998. Relationships between age at puberty and interval from weaning to estrus and between estrus signs at puberty and after the first weaning in pigs. J Anim Sci, 76:353-359.
Tuchscherer M, Kanitz E, Otten W, Tuchscherer A. 2002. Effects of prenatal stress on cellular and humoral immune responses in neonatal pigs. Vet Immunol Immunopathol, 86:195-203.
Young L. 1995. Reproduction of F1 Meishan, Fengjing, Minzhu, and Duroc gilts and sows. J Anim Sci, 73:711- 721.
Young L. 1998. Reproduction of 3/4 White Composite and 1/4 Duroc, 1/4 Meishan, 1/4 Fengjing, or 1/4 Minzhu gilts and sows. J Anim Sci, 76:1559-1567.
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email