Abstract #762
Section: Breeding and Genetics
Session: Breeding and Genetics: Poultry and swine
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Wednesday 2:30 PM–2:45 PM
Location: Panzacola F-3
Session: Breeding and Genetics: Poultry and swine
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Wednesday 2:30 PM–2:45 PM
Location: Panzacola F-3
# 762
Estimates of variance components for gilt retention traits.
Matthew D. A. Morrison*1, Kent A. Gray2, Miles T. See1, Mark T. Knauer1, 1North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 2Smithfield Premium Genetics, Rose Hill, NC.
Key Words: gilt, heritability, retention
Estimates of variance components for gilt retention traits.
Matthew D. A. Morrison*1, Kent A. Gray2, Miles T. See1, Mark T. Knauer1, 1North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 2Smithfield Premium Genetics, Rose Hill, NC.
Numerous studies have been conducted on sow retention and longevity; however, less research has been completed on gilt retention. Increasing the percentage of gilts that farrow a litter would reduce gilt development costs, improve sow longevity, and enhance farmer profitability. Hence the purpose of this study was to estimate variance components for gilt retention traits. Data consisted of 6,282 commercial gilts from Large White dams and Landrace sires (Smithfield Premium Genetics, Rose Hill, NC). During development, gilts were reared in environmentally controlled facilities with slatted concrete flooring, natural ventilation and ad libitum access to feed and water. At an average age of 211 d (SD ± 41.5) females were moved to one of 11 sow farms in eastern North Carolina. Traits included successful gilt farrow event (STAY; success = 1, failure = 2) gilt culled for reproductive (REPRO; Yes = 1, no = 2), or non-reproductive reasons (OTHER, yes = 1, no = 2), age at first service (AFS), and age at first farrowing (AFF). Variance components were estimated using an animal model with THRGIBBS1F90 for categorical traits and AIREMLF90 for linear traits. All models contained a fixed effect of contemporary group (farm × year × month) and a random effect of animal. Of the gilts entering sow farms, 15.4% did not farrow a litter, 7.3% were culled for REPRO, and 8.1% were culled for OTHER. Average AFS and AFF were 262 d (SD ± 24.7) and 377 d (SD ± 24.9), respectively. Heritability estimates for STAY, REPRO, OTHER, AFS, and AFF were 0.15, 0.19, 0.05, 0.27, and 0.21, respectively. Phenotypic variance estimates for STAY, REPRO, OTHER, AFS, and AFF were 1.18, 1.24, 1.06, 356.2, and 386.2, respectively. Results suggest selection for increased gilt retention is possible.
Key Words: gilt, heritability, retention