GxE interactions for growth and carcass leanness: Re-ranking of boars in organic and conventional pig production

Livestock Science

Volumn 123, Issue 2-3, 2009, Pages 154-160

  Wallenbeck, A ^a   Rydhmer, L ^a   Lundeheim, N ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Backfat thickness; Breeding values; Growth rate; GxE interaction; Organic production; Pig

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; SUIDAE;

EID: 67349182319     PISSN: 18711413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2008.11.003     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bapst B. Swiss experience on practical cattle breeding strategies for organic dairy. 4th NAHWOA Workshop, Wageningen, Netherlands (2001) 44-50
2. Boelling D., Groen A.F., Sorensen P., Madsen P., and Jensen J. Genetic improvement of livestock for organic farming systems. Livest. Prod. Sci. 80 (2003) 79-88
3. Brandt H., and Taubert H. Parameter estimates for purebred and crossbred performances in pigs. J. Anim. Breed. Genet.-Z. Tierz. Zungt. Biol. 115 (1998) 97-104
4. Clutter A.C., and Brascamp E.W. Genetics of performance traits. In: Rothschild M.F., and Ruvinsky A. (Eds). The Genetics of the Pig (1998), CAB International, Cambridge 427-462
5. de Jong G. Phenotypic plasticity as a product of selection in a variable environment. Am. Nat. 145 (1995) 493-512
6. Dominik S., and Kinghorn B.P. Neglecting genotype x environment interaction results in biased predictions from selection index calculations. Livest. Sci. 114 (2008) 233-240
7. EU, 1999. Council Regulation (EC) No 1804/1999 of 19 July 1999. In: EU (Ed.).
8. Hirt H., Bestmann M., Nauta W.J., Phillips L., and Spoolder H. Breeding for health and welfare. The 4th NAHWOA Workshop, Wageningen, Netherlands (2001) 114-119
9. Kelly H.R., Browning H.M., Day J.E.L., Martins A., Pearce G.P., Stopes C., and Edwards S.A. Effect of breed type, housing and feeding system on performance of growing pigs managed under organic conditions. J. Sci. Food Agric. 87 (2007) 2794-2800
10. Knap P.W. Breeding robust pigs. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 45 (2005) 763-773
11. KRAV, 2005. Regler för KRAV-godkänd produktion. www.krav.se/regler.
12. Lundeheim N. Field performance testing: how to adjust for variations in test weight. Thai J. Vet. Med. 32 (2002) 87-92
13. Madsen P., and Jensen J. DMU: A Package for Analysing Multivariate Mixed Models (2008). http://dmu.agrsci.dk/ Version 6, release 4.6. http://dmu.agrsci.dk/.
14. McLaren D.G., Buchanan D.S., and Hintz R.L. Sire ranking based upon purebred versus crossbred progeny performance in swine. J. Anim. Sci. 60 (1985) 902-912
15. Merks J.W.M. Genotype x environment interactions in pig breeding programmes. VI. Genetic relations between performances in central test, on-farm test and commercial fattening. Livest. Prod. Sci. 22 (1989) 325-339
16. Nauta W.J., Veerkamp R.F., Brascamp E.W., and Bovenhuis H. Genotype by environment interaction for milk production traits between organic and conventional dairy cattle production in the Netherlands. J. Dairy Sci. 89 (2006) 2729-2737
17. Simonsson A. Näringsrekommendationer och fodermedelstabeller till svin (1994), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Reserch Information Centre, Uppsala
18. Werner D., Brade W., Weismann F., and Brandt H. Performance and carcass quality of genetically different pigs under conventional and organic conditions. In: van der Honing Y. (Ed). Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production (2007), Wageningen Academic Publishers, Dublin, Ireland 277
19. Zumbach B., Misztal I., Tsuruta S., Holl J., Herring W., and Long T. Genetic correlations between two strains of Durocs and crossbreds from differing production environments for slaughter traits. J. Anim. Sci. 85 (2007) 901-908
20. Åkerfeldt Y. De ekologiska uppfödarna blir allt skickligare. Ekol. lantbr. 9 (2006) 23-26. http://www.ekolantbruk.se/tidningen www.ekolantbruk.se/tidningen