| Literature DB >> 35106841 |
Shauna Fitzmaurice1,2, Joanne Conington1, Kevin McDermott3, Noirin McHugh2, Georgios Banos1.
Abstract
Genetic evaluations in sheep have proven to be an effective way of increasing farm profitability. Much research has previously been conducted on producing within-country genetic evaluations; however, to date, no across-country sheep genetic evaluations have been produced between Ireland and the UK. The objective of the present study was to examine the feasibility of an across-country genetic evaluation of live body weight and carcass composition traits for Texel sheep raised in Ireland and the UK. The benefit of genetic selection based on across-country genetic evaluations, in comparison with within-country genetic evaluations, was also quantified. Animal traits included early-life and postweaning live body weights, and muscle and fat depth ultrasound measurements. Irish and UK data were combined, common animals with progeny with records in both countries were identified and a series of bivariate analyses were performed separately for each trait to produce across-country genetic evaluations. Fixed effects included contemporary group, age at first lambing of the dam, parity of the dam (Ireland), dam age at lamb's birth (UK), a gender by age of the lamb interaction, a birth type by rearing type of the lamb interaction and country of birth of the lamb. Random effects included the animal additive genetic, dam maternal, litter common environment and residual effect. The model for postweaning weight, muscle depth and fat depth included only the animal additive genetic and litter common environmental random effects. Genetic correlations between the two countries ranged from 0.82 to 0.88 for the various traits. Across-country breeding values were estimated for all animals and response to selection was predicted using the top 10 and top 20 sires in both within- and across-country analyses for the two countries. Overall, results showed that rates of genetic gain could potentially increase from between 2.59% and 19.63% from selection based on across-country genetic evaluations compared to within-country evaluations alone. Across-country evaluations are feasible and would be of significant benefit to both the Irish and UK sheep industries. In order to realize these potential gains though, there would need to be a switch in emphasis by sheep breeders towards using objective traits as their primary selection criteria.Entities:
Keywords: across-country genetic evaluations; carcass composition; lamb growth; sheep
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35106841 PMCID: PMC9303795 DOI: 10.1111/jbg.12668
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Breed Genet ISSN: 0931-2668 Impact factor: 3.271
Number of records (n), trait mean (µ) and standard deviation (SD), the corresponding mean age of lambs, and estimates of heritability (h 2) with standard error (SE) by country and trait, and genetic correlation of traits between countries
| Trait | Country |
| µ ( | Age |
| Genetic correlation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preweaning weight (kg) | Ireland | 11,891 | 20.86 (4.70) | 46.59 | 0.19 (0.03) | 0.82 |
| Early‐life weight (kg) | UK | 21,480 | 27.16 (6.48) | 65.53 | 0.18 (0.03) | |
| Weaning weight (kg) | Ireland | 12,388 | 36.69 (7.63) | 96.92 | 0.30 (0.03) | 0.38 |
| Early‐life weight (kg) | UK | 21,480 | 27.16 (6.48) | 65.53 | 0.18 (0.03) | |
| Postweaning weight (kg) | Ireland | 12,074 | 48.70 (9.47) | 144.76 | 0.32 (0.03) | 0.88 |
| UK | 13,219 | 49.00 (9.24) | 146.70 | 0.22 (0.03) | ||
| Muscle depth (mm) | Ireland | 8,810 | 32.59 (4.09) | 146.57 | 0.31 (0.03) | 0.85 |
| UK | 12,619 | 28.69 (4.05) | 146.80 | 0.19 (0.03) | ||
| Fat depth (mm) | Ireland | 8,782 | 6.10 (2.70) | 146.63 | 0.20 (0.03) | 0.85 |
| UK | 12,527 | 2.45 (1.26) | 146.80 | 0.18 (0.03) |
Predicted response (ΔG) to top sire selection based on within‐ and across‐country genetic evaluation for early‐life body weight
| Selection scenario | No. of sires | Proportion selected |
|
| σ | Δ | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Within country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 192 | 5.21 | 2.063 | 0.74 | 1.39 | 2.12 | 95.19 |
| Top 20 Sires | 192 | 10.42 | 1.755 | 0.74 | 1.39 | 1.81 | 93.51 |
| Within country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 194 | 5.15 | 2.063 | 0.76 | 1.78 | 2.79 | 97.41 |
| Top 20 Sires | 194 | 10.31 | 1.755 | 0.76 | 1.78 | 2.37 | 95.52 |
| Across country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 276 | 3.62 | 2.197 | 0.73 | 1.39 | 2.23 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 276 | 7.25 | 1.9025 | 0.73 | 1.39 | 1.93 | 100 |
| Across country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 260 | 3.85 | 2.175 | 0.74 | 1.78 | 2.87 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 260 | 7.69 | 1.887 | 0.74 | 1.78 | 2.49 | 100 |
i, intensity of selection; r, average accuracy of selection candidate EBVs; σ, genetic standard deviation of trait; % ΔG achievable within‐compared to across‐country selection.
Predicted response (ΔG) to top sire selection based on within‐ and across‐country genetic evaluation for postweaning weight
| Selection scenario | No. of sires | Proportion selected |
|
|
| Δ | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Within country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 369 | 2.71 | 2.309 | 0.76 | 3.46 | 6.06 | 97.35 |
| Top 20 Sires | 369 | 5.42 | 2.023 | 0.76 | 3.46 | 5.31 | 96.02 |
| Within country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 137 | 7.3 | 1.887 | 0.77 | 2.82 | 4.1 | 85.89 |
| Top 20 Sires | 137 | 14.59 | 1.554 | 0.77 | 2.82 | 3.38 | 80.37 |
| Across country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 473 | 2.11 | 2.4035 | 0.75 | 3.46 | 6.23 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 473 | 4.23 | 2.135 | 0.75 | 3.46 | 5.53 | 100 |
| Across country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 325 | 3.08 | 2.2555 | 0.75 | 2.82 | 4.77 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 325 | 6.15 | 1.985 | 0.75 | 2.82 | 4.2 | 100 |
i, intensity of selection; r, average accuracy of selection candidate EBVs; σ, genetic standard deviation of trait; % ΔG achievable within‐ compared to across‐country selection.
Predicted response (ΔG) to top sire selection based on within‐ and across‐country genetic evaluation for muscle depth
| Selection scenario | No. of sires | Proportion selected |
|
|
| Δ | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Within country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 279 | 3.58 | 2.197 | 0.76 | 1.66 | 2.77 | 97.00 |
| Top 20 Sires | 279 | 7.17 | 1.918 | 0.76 | 1.66 | 2.42 | 96.07 |
| Within country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 125 | 8 | 1.858 | 0.75 | 1.3 | 1.81 | 87.42 |
| Top 20 Sires | 125 | 16 | 1.521 | 0.75 | 1.3 | 1.49 | 82.97 |
| Across country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 348 | 2.87 | 2.295 | 0.75 | 1.66 | 2.86 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 348 | 5.75 | 2.023 | 0.75 | 1.66 | 2.52 | 100 |
| Across country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 246 | 4.07 | 2.154 | 0.74 | 1.3 | 2.08 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 246 | 8.13 | 1.858 | 0.74 | 1.3 | 1.79 | 100 |
i, intensity of selection; r, average accuracy of selection candidate EBVs; σ, genetic standard deviation of trait; % ΔG achievable within‐ compared to across‐country selection.
Predicted response (ΔG) to top sire selection based on within‐ and across‐country genetic evaluation for fat depth
| Selection scenario | No. of sires | Proportion selected |
|
|
| Δ | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Within country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 165 | 6.06 | 1.985 | 0.74 | 0.1 | 0.15 | 93.80 |
| Top 20 Sires | 165 | 12.12 | 1.667 | 0.74 | 0.1 | 0.13 | 93.67 |
| Within country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 119 | 8.4 | 1.831 | 0.75 | 0.42 | 0.57 | 92.99 |
| Top 20 Sires | 119 | 16.81 | 1.489 | 0.75 | 0.42 | 0.47 | 89.51 |
| Across country—Ireland | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 228 | 4.39 | 2.116 | 0.73 | 0.1 | 0.16 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 228 | 8.77 | 1.804 | 0.73 | 0.1 | 0.14 | 100 |
| Across country—UK | |||||||
| Top 10 Sires | 182 | 5.49 | 2.023 | 0.73 | 0.42 | 0.62 | 100 |
| Top 20 Sires | 182 | 10.99 | 1.709 | 0.73 | 0.42 | 0.52 | 100 |
i, intensity of selection; r, average accuracy of selection candidate EBVs; σ, genetic standard deviation of trait; % ΔG achievable within‐ compared to across‐country selection.