Abstract #M68
Section: Breeding and Genetics
Session: Breeding and Genetics: Application and methods in animal breeding - Swine, poultry, and other species
Format: Poster
Day/Time: Monday 7:30 AM–9:30 AM
Location: Gatlin Ballroom
Session: Breeding and Genetics: Application and methods in animal breeding - Swine, poultry, and other species
Format: Poster
Day/Time: Monday 7:30 AM–9:30 AM
Location: Gatlin Ballroom
# M68
Genetic parameters for length of productive life and lifetime production traits of purebred Landrace and Yorkshire sows in northern Thailand.
Udomsak Noppibool*1,2, Skorn Koonawootrittriron1, Mauricio A. Elzo2, Thanathip Suwanasopee1, 1Kasetsart University, Chatuchak, Bangkok, Thailand, 2University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Key Words: genetic parameter, lifetime production trait, swine
Genetic parameters for length of productive life and lifetime production traits of purebred Landrace and Yorkshire sows in northern Thailand.
Udomsak Noppibool*1,2, Skorn Koonawootrittriron1, Mauricio A. Elzo2, Thanathip Suwanasopee1, 1Kasetsart University, Chatuchak, Bangkok, Thailand, 2University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
The objective of this research was to estimate genetic parameters and trends for length of productive life (LPL), lifetime piglets born alive (LBA), lifetime piglets weaned (LPW), lifetime piglets’ birth weight (LBW), lifetime piglets’ weaning weight (LWW) in a commercial swine farm in Northern Thailand. Phenotypic records came from 1,983 Landrace (L) and 745 Yorkshire sows (Y) collected from July 1989 to August 2013. Variance and covariance components, heritabilities and correlations were estimated using a multiple-trait AIREML procedure. The 5-trait mixed animal model contained the fixed effects of first farrowing year-season, breed group (L and Y), and age at first farrowing. Random effects were sow and residual. Medium heritabilities were estimated for all 5 traits (LPL = 0.16 ± 0.04; LBA = 0.18 ± 0.04; LPW = 0.22 ± 0.04, LBW 0.18 ± 0.04 and LWW = 0.22 ± 0.04). Genetic correlations among these traits were positive and favorable (greater than 0.91; P < 0.05). Genetic correlation estimates were 0.94 ± 0.02 for LPL-LBA, 0.98 ± 0.03 for LPL-LPW, 0.92 ± 0.03 for LPL-LBW, 0.93 ± 0.02 for LPL-LWW, 0.96 ± 0.01 for LBA-LPW, 0.96 ± 0.01 for LBA-LBW, 0.93 ± 0.02 for LBA-LWW, 0.93 ± 0.02 for LPW-LBW, 0.97 ± 0.01 for LPW-LWW and 0.94 ± 0.02 for LBW-LWW. Dam genetic trends were positive, small and significant only for LBA (0.18 ± 0.05 piglets/yr; P = 0.0024), LPW (0.12 ± 0.05 piglets/yr; P = 0.0153), LBW (0.35 ± 0.09 kg/yr; P = 0.0009), and LWW (1.36 ± 0.40 kg/yr; P = 0.0024). Genetic trends for sows and sires were mostly small, negative and not significant for any trait. Thus, the selection program in this commercial herd was ineffective to improve LPL in sows, sires, and dams, and lifetime production traits in sows and sires. This program was only effective to improve lifetime productive traits in dams.
Key Words: genetic parameter, lifetime production trait, swine