Literature DB >> 22952377

Genetic associations between behavioral traits and direct-social effects of growth rate in pigs.

L Canario1, S P Turner, R Roehe, N Lundeheim, R B D'Eath, A B Lawrence, E Knol, R Bergsma, L Rydhmer.   

Abstract

This study examined the behavioral consequences of selecting pigs using a social genetic model for growth. Calculations enable each member of a group of pigs to be given a direct breeding value (DBV) and a social breeding value (SBV), which can be summarized into a total breeding value (TBV) for growth. Selection for growth TBV could affect animal behavior because social effects account for within-group interactions. Data were recorded from 96 groups of Yorkshire and Yorkshire × Landrace pigs in a nucleus herd. Each group contained 15 pigs fed ad libitum from 2 feeders; the space allowance was 0.85 m2/pig. Average daily gain was quantified from 35 to 100 kg of BW. Fighting and bullying activity at mixing (period 1), lying frequency 3 wk after mixing (period 2), and counts of skin lesions in periods 1 and 2 were recorded. The DBV for these traits were estimated with a classic animal model. We simulated different correlations between the direct genetic effect and the social genetic effect on growth rate (r(DS)), 2 components that respectively determine a pig's genetic capacity to grow and its genetic influence on growth of group mates: r(DS) was successively assumed to be 0 and ±0.12, ±0.20, ±0.29, and ±0.58. Finally, the correlations between DBV, SBV, and TBV for ADG, as well as the DBV for behavior and skin lesions, were calculated and tested for a level of significance at P < 0.05. The gradient from negative to positive values of r(DS) refers to a progressive path running from genetic antagonism to genetic mutualism for growth. If rDS in the population truly ranged between -0.58 and -0.20, correlations for TBV for ADG with DBV for fighting and bullying progressively increased with rDS. Consequently, if rDS was low (between -0.12 and +0.12) or positive (>+0.12), pigs with high TBV for ADG had higher DBV for bullying other pigs in the group and for fighting than pigs with lower TBV for ADG. Pigs with high TBV for ADG did not differ from other pigs in their DBV for lesions to the anterior part of the body, but they had a lower DBV for posterior lesions, whereas in period 2, they had higher DBV for posterior lesions and lower DBV for lying. Under genetic mutualism for growth and in housing conditions similar to those in the present study, selection for growth TBV would promote the rapid establishment of the dominance relationships, with more aggressive contests among group mates at mixing. Pigs would subsequently be more active but, judging by skin lesions, less willing to fight in a more stable social situation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22952377     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2012-5392

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  10 in total

1.  Indirect Genetic Effects for Growth in Pigs Affect Behaviour and Weight Around Weaning.

Authors:  Irene Camerlink; Winanda W Ursinus; Andrea C Bartels; Piter Bijma; J Elizabeth Bolhuis
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 2.805

2.  Selection for social genetic effects in purebreds increases growth in crossbreds.

Authors:  Birgitte Ask; Lizette Vestergaard Pedersen; Ole Fredslund Christensen; Hanne Marie Nielsen; Simon P Turner; Bjarne Nielsen
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 4.297

3.  The Role of Genetic Selection on Agonistic Behavior and Welfare of Gestating Sows Housed in Large Semi-Static Groups.

Authors:  Sophie Brajon; Jamie Ahloy-Dallaire; Nicolas Devillers; Frédéric Guay
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 2.752

4.  Indirect genetic effects and housing conditions in relation to aggressive behaviour in pigs.

Authors:  Irene Camerlink; Simon P Turner; Piter Bijma; J Elizabeth Bolhuis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Indirect genetic effects for growth rate in domestic pigs alter aggressive and manipulative biting behaviour.

Authors:  Irene Camerlink; Winanda W Ursinus; Piter Bijma; Bas Kemp; J Elizabeth Bolhuis
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  2014-09-17       Impact factor: 2.805

6.  Interaction of direct and social genetic effects with feeding regime in growing rabbits.

Authors:  Miriam Piles; Ingrid David; Josep Ramon; Laurianne Canario; Oriol Rafel; Mariam Pascual; Mohamed Ragab; Juan P Sánchez
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2017-07-20       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Longitudinal analysis of direct and indirect effects on average daily gain in rabbits using a structured antedependence model.

Authors:  Ingrid David; Juan-Pablo Sánchez; Miriam Piles
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 4.297

8.  Social network properties predict chronic aggression in commercial pig systems.

Authors:  Simone Foister; Andrea Doeschl-Wilson; Rainer Roehe; Gareth Arnott; Laura Boyle; Simon Turner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  How to Improve Meat Quality and Welfare in Entire Male Pigs by Genetics.

Authors:  Catherine Larzul
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 2.752

10.  Functionally Antagonistic Transcription Factors IRF1 and IRF2 Regulate the Transcription of the Dopamine Receptor D2 Gene Associated with Aggressive Behavior of Weaned Pigs.

Authors:  Jing Zhao; Siyuan Gao; Yanli Guo; Qinglei Xu; Mingzheng Liu; Chunlei Zhang; Meng Cheng; Xianle Zhao; Allan P Schinckel; Bo Zhou
Journal:  Biology (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-14
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.