Additive and heterotic breed effects in the genetic evaluation of pig sire breeds

Animal Science

Volumn 82, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 455-462

  Wolf, J ^a   Peskovicova D ^b   Zakova E ^a   Groeneveld, E ^c  

^a INSTITUTE OF ANIMAL SCIENCE   (Czech Republic)

^b SLOVAK AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTRE   (Slovakia)

^c INSTITUTE FOR EPIDEMIOLOGY AND PATHOGEN DIAGNOSTICS   (Germany)

Author keywords

Animal models; Heterosis; Pigs; Production; Sire evaluation

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; PIERIS BRASSICAE; SUIDAE;

EID: 34247517905     PISSN: 13577298     EISSN: 1748748X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1079/ASC200655     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Baas, T. J., Christian, L. L. and Rothschild, M. F. 1992. Heterosis and recombination effects in Hampshire and Landrace swine: II. Performance and carcass traits. Journal of Animal Science 70: 99-105.
2. Bijma, P. and van Arendonk, J. A. M. 1998. Maximizing genetic gain for the sire line of a crossbreeding scheme utilizing both purebred and crossbred information. Animal Science 66: 529-542.
3. Bittante, G., Gallo, L. and Montobbio, P. 1993. Estimated breed additive effects and direct heterosis for growth and carcass traits of heavy pigs. Livestock Production Science 34: 101-114.
4. Brandt, H. 1994. [Relation between production traits of purebred and crossbred pigs and consequences for optimizing the selection.] Habilitation. Cultiver Verlag Göttingen 1996, Universität Göttingen.
5. Brandt, H. and Täubert, H. 1998. Parameter estimates for purebred and crossbred performances in pigs. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 115: 97-104.
6. Buchanan, D. S. 1987. The crossbred sire: experimental results for swine. Journal of Animal Science 65: 117-127.
7. Cassady, J. P., Young, L. D. and Leymaster, K. A. 2002. Heterosis and recombination effects on pig growth and carcass traits. Journal of Animal Science 80: 2286-2302.
8. Fischer, R. 1998. [Estimation of genetic parameters for purebred and crossbred performance in pig.] Ph.D. thesis, Martin-Luther Universiẗt Halle-Wittenberg.
9. García Casco, J. M. and Silio, L. 1991. [Heterosis on growth traits in Iberian pigs.] ITEA 87A: 218-226.
10. Glodek, P. 1996. [The choice of sire line determines the quality of final products in pigs.] Züchtungskunde 68: 483-492.
11. Groeneveld, E. and Garcia Cortes, A. 1998. VCE 4.0, a (co) variance components package for frequentists and bayesians. Proceeding of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Armidale, vol. 27, pp. 455-456.
12. Groeneveld, E., Kovac, M. and Wang, T. 1990. PEST, a general purpose BLUP package for multivariate prediction and estimation. Proceedings of the fourth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Edinburgh, vol. 13, pp. 488-491.
13. Kendall, M. G. 1970. Rank correlation methods, fourth edition. Griffin, London.
14. Lutaaya, E., Misztal, I., Mabry, J. W., Short, T., Timm, H. H. and Holzbauer, R. 2001. Genetic parameter estimates from joint evaluation of purebreds and crossbreds in swine using the crossbred model. Journal of Animal Science 79: 3002-3007.
15. Lutaaya, E., Misztal, I., Mabry, J. W., Short, T., Timm, H. H. and Holzbauer, R. 2002. Joint evaluation of purebreds and crossbreds in swine. Journal of Animal Science 80: 2263-2266.
16. McLaren, D. G., Buchanan, D. S. and Johnson, R. K. 1987. Growth performance for four breeds of swine: crossbred females and purebred and crossbred boars. Journal of Animal Science 64: 99-108.
17. Merks, J. W. M. and Hanenberg, E. H. A. T. 1998. Optimal selection strategy for crossbred performance in commercial pig breeding programmes. Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Armidale, vol. 23, pp. 575-578.
18. Neely, J. D. and Robison, O. W. 1983. Estimates of heterosis for sexual activity in boars. Journal of Animal Science 56: 1033-1038.
19. Neumaier, A. and Groeneveld, E. 1998. Restricted maximum likelihood estimation of covariances in sparse linear models. Genetics Selection Evolution 30: 3-26.
20. Rothschild, M. and Bidanel, J. P. 1998. Biology and genetics of reproduction. The genetics of the pig (ed. M. Rothschild and A. Ruvinsky), pp. 313-343, CAB International, Wallingford.
21. Serenius, T., Sevón-Aimonen, M. -L. and Mäntysaari, E. A. 2002. Modelling crossbred information in genetic evaluation of litter size in Finnish pig populations. Proceedings of the seventh world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Montpellier, vol. 30, pp. 83-86.
22. Smital, J., DeSousa, L. L. and Mohsen, A. 2004. Differences among breeds and manifestation of heterosis in AI boar sperm output. Animal Reproduction Science 80: 121-130.
23. Wolf, J., Horáčkov́, Š., Groeneveld, E. and Peškovičová, D. 2000. Estimation of genetic parameters for sire pig breeds using purebred and crossbred information. Czech Journal of Animal Science 45: 525-532.
24. Wolf, J., Peškovičová, D., Wolfová, M. and Groeneveld, E. 2002. Impact of genetic groups and crossbred information on the prediction of breeding values in pig sire breeds. Czech Journal of Animal Science 47: 219-229.