Literature DB >> 27333975

Impact of selection for residual feed intake on production traits and behavior of mule ducks.

L Drouilhet1, R Monteville2, C Molette2, M Lague3, A Cornuez3, L Canario2, E Ricard2, H Gilbert2.   

Abstract

A divergent selection experiment of Muscovy sires based on the residual feed intake (RFI) of their male mule progeny was initiated in 2009. Using electronic feeders, the aim of this study was to establish whether 3 generations of selection for RFI had an impact on feeding behavior traits and general behavior, and to examine its effect on liver and meat quality. Eighty mule ducks, issued from 8 Muscovy drakes per line with extreme RFI, were tested in a pen equipped with 4 electronic feeders. Feeding behaviors were recorded from 3 to 7 wk after hatching under ad libitum feeding conditions. Then animals were prepared for overfeeding with a 3-week period of restricted feeding, and overfed during 12 d before slaughter. The RFI was significantly lower in the low RFI line than in the high RFI line (-5.4 g/d, P = 0.0005) and daily feed intake was reduced both over the entire test period (-5 g/d, P = 0.049) and on a weekly basis (P = 0.006). Weekly and total feed conversion ratios were also significantly lower (-0.08, P = 0.03 and -0.06, P = 0.01, respectively). Low RFI ducks had more frequent meals, spent as much time eating as high RFI ducks, and their feeding rate was lower when analyzed at the wk level only. Additionally no significant correlation between feed efficiency and feeding behavior traits was evidenced, indicating only limited relationships between RFI and feeding patterns. Some differences in behavioral responses to stressors (open field test combined with a test measuring the response to human presence) suggested that a lower RFI is associated with less fearfulness. Selection for RFI had no effect on liver weight and quality and a slightly deleterious impact on meat quality (decreased drip loss and L*). Finally, low RFI animals had higher body weights after restricted feeding from wk 10 to wk 12 and after overfeeding than high RFI ducks. This suggests that selection for reduced RFI until 7 wk of age increases the feed efficiency up to slaughter.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Poultry Science Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  carcass composition; feeding behavior; general behavior; mule duck; residual feed intake

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27333975      PMCID: PMC4983686          DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew185

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Poult Sci        ISSN: 0032-5791            Impact factor:   3.352


  24 in total

1.  Relationship between feed intake, feeding behaviors, performance, and ultrasound carcass measurements in growing purebred Angus and Hereford bulls.

Authors:  W Kayser; R A Hill
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  The relationship of feeding behavior to residual feed intake in crossbred Angus steers fed traditional and no-roughage diets.

Authors:  J W Golden; M S Kerley; W H Kolath
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2007-09-04       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Divergent selection for residual feed intake in group-housed growing pigs: characteristics of physical and behavioural activity according to line and sex.

Authors:  M C Meunier-Salaün; C Guérin; Y Billon; P Sellier; J Noblet; H Gilbert
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Behavioural differences between laying hen populations selected for high and low efficiency of food utilisation.

Authors:  B O Braastad; J Katle
Journal:  Br Poult Sci       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 2.095

5.  Effect of thermal heat stress on energy utilization in two lines of pigs divergently selected for residual feed intake.

Authors:  D Renaudeau; G Frances; S Dubois; H Gilbert; J Noblet
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Metabolic changes and tissue responses to selection on residual feed intake in growing pigs.

Authors:  T Le Naou; N Le Floc'h; I Louveau; H Gilbert; F Gondret
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Feed efficiency effects on barrow and gilt behavioral reactivity to novel stimuli tests.

Authors:  J D Colpoys; C E Abell; N K Gabler; A F Keating; S T Millman; J M Siegford; J M Young; A K Johnson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Major growth QTLs in fowl are related to fearful behavior: possible genetic links between fear responses and production traits in a red junglefowl x white leghorn intercross.

Authors:  Karin E Schütz; Susanne Kerje; Lina Jacobsson; Björn Forkman; Orjan Carlborg; Leif Andersson; Per Jensen
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 2.805

9.  Improving residual feed intake of mule progeny of Muscovy ducks: genetic parameters and responses to selection with emphasis on carcass composition and fatty liver quality.

Authors:  L Drouilhet; B Basso; M-D Bernadet; A Cornuez; L Bodin; I David; H Gilbert; C Marie-Etancelin
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2014-08-01       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Consequences of divergent selection for residual feed intake in pigs on muscle energy metabolism and meat quality.

Authors:  J Faure; L Lefaucheur; N Bonhomme; P Ecolan; K Meteau; S Metayer Coustard; M Kouba; H Gilbert; B Lebret
Journal:  Meat Sci       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 5.209

View more
  3 in total

1.  Genome-wide association study reveals novel loci associated with feeding behavior in Pekin ducks.

Authors:  Guang-Sheng Li; Feng Zhu; Fan Zhang; Fang-Xi Yang; Jin-Ping Hao; Zhuo-Cheng Hou
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 3.969

2.  Selection response and genetic parameter estimation of feeding behavior traits in Pekin ducks.

Authors:  Guang-Sheng Li; Feng Zhu; Fang-Xi Yang; Jin-Ping Hao; Zhuo-Cheng Hou
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Systematic analysis of feeding behaviors and their effects on feed efficiency in Pekin ducks.

Authors:  Feng Zhu; Yahui Gao; Fangbin Lin; Jinping Hao; Fangxi Yang; Zhuocheng Hou
Journal:  J Anim Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2017-11-01
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.