Crossbreeding experiments on meat rabbits in a survey
Transcription
Crossbreeding experiments on meat rabbits in a survey
Crossbreeding experiments on meat rabbits in Northern Mediterranean Countries: A survey Masoero G. in Rouvier R. (ed.), Baselga M. (ed.). Rabbit production and genetics in the Mediterranean area Zaragoza : CIHEAM Options Méditerranéennes : Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 17 1991 pages 53-66 Article available on lin e / Article dispon ible en lign e à l’adresse : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------http://om.ciheam.org/article.php?IDPDF=92605161 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------To cite th is article / Pou r citer cet article -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Masoero G. Crossbreedin g experimen ts on meat rabbits in North ern Mediterran ean Cou n tries: A su rvey. In : Rouvier R. (ed.), Baselga M. (ed.). Rabbit production and genetics in the Mediterranean area . Zaragoza : CIHEAM, 1991. p. 53-66 (Options Méditerranéennes : Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 17) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.ciheam.org/ http://om.ciheam.org/ CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Crossbreeding experiments on meat rabbits in a survey MASOERO ISTITUTO SPERIMENTALE PERLA ZOOTECNIA, VIA PIANEZZA, 5 , lO1 51, TORINO, ITALY effects. The most selected in modulated to the conditions at fixed weight. associated with can be with to be weaning, also in development of new will be anexcellent tool words: is highly dependent on aim of is the synthetics. capitalize and of the economic in populations and out in Stations in Spain and examined and analyzed The can be of the weight at fixed age exploiting New Zealand W. and does by Giants medium sized bucks is of fat, skinand when the weight is held -statistically- constant. The efficiency. Feed efficiency ethiology has investigated. size is a facts often involved in the in thenet of size at Thus should be taken into account The using will and as mammals. sur des lapins cì viande dans les pays la :t o w d’horizon’‘. La production intensive du lapin dépend dans une grande mesure des croisements. Les souches contmerciales bénéficient largement des effets d’hétérosis et de complémentarité. L’objectif primordial de la reclterche est la caractérisation des populations et espèces, et également des souches sélectionnées ri partir d ’ m e espèce, ou bien synthétiques, en ce qui concerne les aspects d’importance éconontique. et en Les caractères de passeronsenrevuequelques expérimentationsmenéesdans des Stations era France. en production et de reproduction sont exantints et analysés séparément. Les caractères de croissance peuvent être modulés selon le potentiel génétique direct du mâle. et l’on peut ainsi augmenter le poids de la carcasse à un âge donné améliorer les performances des jeunes pour atteindre un poidsfixé. Lorsque l’on croise des Blanches et Californiennes avec des nuîles de race Géante ou taille nloyenne, en général, la quantité de gras, de peau et la tnille du foie dimiment, enpourcentage du poids total de ln carcasse. La période de croissance peut se voir fortentent réduite grâce ci Lule efficacité nteilleure. La recherche devra se poursuivre dans le domaine de l’éthiologie de l’efficacité alimentaire. La taille de la portée est un caractère très important qu’il fnudm étudier. La mortalité est un aspect qui fait partiedes différences entre races reflétées dans les moyennes nettes de taille de portée au sevrage, et qui a une composante génétique. conséquent, cette ntortalìté devrait être considérée c o n m e il se doit dans les expériences ~rltérienres.Des recherches plus approfondies devront 2tre menées a f i ~ tde mettre au point de nouvelles souches dans les pays du de la en utilisant la recombinaison naturelle OIL artificielle. L e lapin est L m excellent sujet pour la production et un bon nzodèle pour les ntammifères domestiques. Lapin, croisement, races. Introduction exploiting the gene closely linked with pool. All the complex Options Some exist of small complete selection units. The basic female line of the meat is issued New Zealand White selected negligible with 1989) this kind of femalesis not negligible - - n” 17 - 1992: 53-66 Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes - while in 1988). own - to 25%is The weaning weight(WW), the stabilisation of the following: daily New have not by 1989) is possible. effects: daily gain be on daily gain 1988). is the Feed Constant Weight (FCW), that is the estimated amount of feed ingested by the animals between two fixed body weights et al. 1985). THE FRENCH EXPERIMENTS at multiplication and levels. 1980's the main axis of seemed to be the intensification of Ten the goals moved to size Atthe managementlevelthe longevity of the does is somewhat balanced by high The of is balanced by the of the waiting cages and of the the of the allows simplified diets. - 2,6 kg) now Toulousesome NandC to (1971 and 1973), (1972) and (1988). Table 1shows (5 to lo./,) of N vs C. N efficiency only at fixed ages the was the N unselected and 1988), which was less efficient because of the weight at in the was minimum in the selected N vs the unselected N and also vs C. The of the with d was made specific C to C, the the big Stations, to achieve massive in the usual 30-70177 (SF) and in the 1-a), while the 1-c). The hand the Technico-Economical with with of - Spain) 1990)) allow some opinion on the genetic state of +hc Productive traits The existence of suggests to them. The is of the single multiway and efficiency. The classical of (1978) of the expected inequalities of medium sized half giant half C was so the to N 3% in the medium sized and 10% in the Giants, but the efficiency not at that fixed The meatqualities both 9% of the possibly of some at as butsystematic studies of the combinations which could be obtained New The is (N) CAL (C)basis (table A). -4%. N, while tobe et FG we 1985, Tab 5): no effect on meathone bucks when some bucksF1 FG and N to N and C does then was significantly by 7% 1986). The classic -54- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens of of (1970) (Table 3) on CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes composition of - the SF also SF > % > - the skeleton weight was -the fat content was - equality in SF; in SF and muscle contents in medium sized was effective: al.(1982) (Table 4) in a the 1027 against local conditions: at 2400 kcal was: 17,3; 13,5 10,4% . The and the body composition quite but with the diets. The advantage of selected and -6% was 7% feed efficiency (wastaging excluded: 3,25 vs 3,47 g/g) -3% as kcal /g of gain (7.95vs 8,18) and +9, +11% muscling KNOWLEDGE FROM SPAIN Spanish is suitedtostudy the meat of Giant the weight inSpain at 60-70 d is the lightest 1,9 kg. So the types should be 1989). The Valencia on as well as on the knowledge of meatandbone et al., 1984) andon functions. (1982) 7% of N vs C in 1988) to exist between N and C being limited tothefat of thetotal not given 1982) by (1988) some new available: scientific and technical bulletin as well as some thesis Atthe of in 28 on 15genetic types of bucks and C and N females. At 245 the 603 The was complemented by (1985) with 6 genetic types. The was by (1988) who utilized the same type of F1 bucks. and (1987) studied the possibility of N, C and Vien A point is the definition of the as N C always on all the available (diallel) can be pooled (=N&C) as unbiased means of of the additive genetic value. This is inclusive of the eventually non additive effects the sense in of (1969). 8 as as F1 bucks by some l 8 cells. The tables 5.2 and 5.3 give the means of of the N&Cpools. Surveying by breed - Fawn: in WW, efficient inconstant basis. The it is fat and with unconstant SF because of high (FCW). As efficient on in % the fatness weight sometimes WW and within it is and exceptionally - Vien good WW as but not as being good is but not always linked to efficiency (FCW); the skin weight F1 effect) and the fat is as well as the weight; length (CL) was but the good. T - a WW, and with efficiency on time basis as we can also see the high of fatness in the signs of skin, while the hot YO The is with good CG - Chinchilla in both types to be in fat and good. L - Lops: highly and among genetic types, as not as and seem weight. The the seemed to lengthened. G§ - Giant Spotted: its good aptitudes seem to when F1 bucks Good as efficiency (FCW). Skin weight weight so the was unchanged. FG - Flemish Giant: as 1 it was (26%) and in feed efficiency (-8% -23% in in (balanced -5s- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes by skin weight vs fatand gives thin As it was negative and again skin weight but the was unchanged. The compactness was A skin weight (when is the almost of methods thickness density. This is of consequences as know. Also the weight skips down, which causes fatness is delayed by with The shape of of bone was length.Thus compactness is The feed efficiency be depending on time with economic consequences. points data, fixed. 7.1 the of 1970’s some 4954 alive two of cells the means of the size at weaning side the two (in negative sign) with weaning the second is the including with The bias in the index is evident. The is not losses of did not The genetic effects to (1969) significant at except which only in 1980. This may be explained by the 70/80 the F1 (8% less). life this On the Phenotypic andgenetic effects on litter size A be is size in given the complexity of the analytical methodsneeded to investigate the biological components. THEINRA SCHEMES The long time of has a investigated and selected specific 1066 1077 (N), 1089 and 1978). The is as female: 75.3 vs 63 (Ni-C) to (1973), but also good as 73 vs 58 and 68 C and N (Table 6). in C dams (23 vs 15%), which seems to be a biological specificities often did not with easy that is well known in all Giant types, as well as in smalled types. Thus 1089 was employed as selffemales. at weaning (i) the individual high (11 and S./); while a significant level (ii) genetic individual effects (0.70 effects 0.66’” to -0.22” (iii), while genetic effects -0.98“ to -0.12 (4). These changes in components of WLS may be well explained in of in the values low. Table 7.2 is in the SAS package, 1987) of being S of and of as well as ‘80 vs ‘70 we a the because of a in N classes: this fact explains the point (ii). STRAINS IN VALENCIA Spain (ESTANY, 1988) N vs C of Valencia team as and WLS, N and C 7.16 ; 5.77 and 8.71 ; 7.02 included), thus was alike (19.4%). A C of 20% the genetic basis selection as the selection was two geneticevolution is (diallel while on the combinations 1066 dam 1077) the many analysed and by (1988) of inStation field only some level level (1066 1077). to this (1988) some capital WLS (a good being 11 vs C vs of the 1986: N= 954 6.62 ; 7.22 and 5.90; 6.17, thus ability” was N. -56- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes To test a simple genetic effects, a was to estimate lasting (Tables 8, 1991) involving 1789 of does N & C and also 383 a (TT). The data in a physiological basis. This was because we only 6 bucks unknown C (sampled small some cells missing. We effects on WLS. The genetic effects by simple modelsbecause of the whole was impossible. Additive genetic effects at to N (-0,54* vs C as and -0.71*:y’as effects). phase individual genotype N, genetic N, (0.42””:k died)thus thenet effect on WLS N was only -0.11 as effect and -0.29 as Non additive individual effects but only as individual (1.23 *** not as additive effects (0.6ly”>*) as at weaning (0.20). The chief evidence this was the of individual individuals became the also effective the weaning and 0.81y:WLS). References e i 37 (199): 85-99. and e 50- in 52. 25 (2): 26-33. EstudioGenético y Selecciónde and 110 pp. J., of Sél. Evol., 16: 367-384. in the effects du (1.06*’*’ Génét. Sél. Evol. 20: 367-378. These genetic effects with a of does 5/8 N that is, the (N(C(CN))). Could these be ? on field could be J. of and 168-176. à Conclusions is la many cases. effects onthe selection on be neglected. the be investigated, being the of The building of new by will the need size as well the fitness in the intensive be examined Also feed efficiency ethiology has to beinvestigated: the could be especially if genetic causes may be displayed till the effects. de et fin #Etudes Toulouse. 4-9 sept 1988: 352-360. E. y mammals. J. (1988): J., ESTANY, J. will be an excellent and as a F.(1982): J., S., -57- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes de Valencia, (E): 322 pp. 4-5 1978: (22): 1-5. and Zelanda, (1985): di da 24 (1): 53-58. of Udine, G. (1982): feed efficiency in on Genetic (E), 4-8 6: Applied to 499-512. 134 pp. (1978): Etude le poids adulte. Thèse and Tech.du Languedoc.:llO pp. and J.L. (1973): et de ses et de et Cunic., Comm. 4: de la composantes G. (1985): La genetica nell’allevamento del coniglio. Atti 1985: 24-40. G., and di Nuova Zelanda Ann. 1st. 89-93. A., su (1985): vivo. (1987): Stazione Alpina di Sauze d’Oulx nell’anno 1987. Tech. N- 19: 28 pp. (2): 93-109. G., (1988): Genetics of (1984-1987). 10-14 meat su coniglie (1986): Zelanda 1st. (1970): 19 (2): 67- à l’abattage et de la composition anatomique de Ann. Génét. Sél. Animale, 2: 325-346. 84. and (1986): 23 (3): 64-67. (1971): génétique du lapin de 10-12 sept. 1971 G., (1987): Quale genetica?. Atti Convegno : (1973): La selezione coniglio. 7-9 1973. di anni’’, Venegazzù (TV) 21 nov. 1987: 13-24. and in “Genetic in de de cycle, Univ. Sci. l’allevamento in (1988): (1991): F. en et sélection du and 18-19 gen. 1991: 21-45. N” A-8,1990, and (3): 29-34. G., and R. (1978): Etude 6 lapins de de la de de SAS (1987): - 58- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens N Y , USA. CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Table A. Abbreviations of the name of the breeds and strains rable B. Abbreviations of the used variables. Size (alive) NU Unselected N WLS SF SG Spotted Giant CG Chinchilla FG Flemish Giant at 28 d LSW Live T Weight FCW Food at Constant Weights Table 1. Weight Fat Weight of medium sized strains at the Toulouse Centre (as % deviate from 100). T TN N C SF N C C N SF N C C LW28 136 4 5 111 571 34,s 64 8 7 -2 6 O -13 -10 -13 -15 3,5S = 100 -9 -11 -11 -10 o N N C N .k C * N * C SF * * r: N C NU N C C N NU N C 5 11 497 9 102 211 93 157 98 71 60 34 35 39 42 60 37 33 17 6 6 . -6 6 567 12 9 2 -4 10 7 30,5 6 3 7 10 7 1 31,s 7 8 6 7 (NU = New Zealand Unselected, N= A1077, C = A1066). -59- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens S 7 103 6 5 8 8 2 5 96 9 9 4 9 -8 -16 -12 -2 -1 3,38 = 100 O 2 O -2 -1 4 2,90 = 100 7 6 2 6 CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Table 2. Terminal sires of different adult size mated (1978) (relative differenceto 1077 sire). 1067 (C. N.) does: the Ouhayoun's experiment % Compact. at 77d bone 435 4,70 3,55 3,70 3,65 3,70 2,60 5,3 5,s FG 3s 3.8 3.7 2.8 127 1027 1077 1089 16 19 O 12 -4 656 7 -1 1 -4 9 2 O 2 2 O 3,6 8 25 10 3 3 37,5 -9 -26 10 8 3 2 2 23 -4 -10 l ' 5,6 9 ' 11 -4 -17 8 O 68,3 = 100 8 11 Note: 1027= 4 1077= N unselected (NU) = 1089= X Table 3. Body composition 1970) ofFrenchbreeds ("/O) Table 4. Selected vs local rabbitson different diets et al. 1982). I g 1027 37,O -2 -22 i 1 11 22 t 1 2 j X X -22 I -10 -11 -30 8,18 j j ; (X in crossbreeding: material and methods. N, C, SF, d N, L, CG,GS. N N, L, CG, GS. N N, C, L e N,L.N,CG.N,SG. FG N, C N, N c II N N N N dl-d2 35-84 225 I84 212 I 8 9 41-77 32-74 168 I 3 6 I I36 45-85 60 I120 40-90 76 I 7 6 99 28-77 72 __-_________--_-_ -2000 I437 SLW 2450 2800 et al., 1985,1986 et al., 1986 1988 1987 1985 1987 et al., 1987 2400 -60- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens -12 -12 -17 133 as deviation of the N livelslaugh, f x i 31,9 Table c' -5 -3L L 9 2 1 -4 % of the a b c 2 X -6L 9 4 58 -5 -5 160 O 1 ! I 3,28 -2 2 -4 -8 -7 -28 1 3,46 7,95 121 CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes % to reference C & N, Table 5.2. Survey of reported below). Tab 5.1. LW28 Fawn * 10 * -11 63 -8,O 228 0,o -10 -6 11 * -5 11.0 * -12,o 0,o -11 11* 3 -11* 11* 9,0 * 5,o -l,o * -9 5": 7,O 370 2,o 3 9 -6 * -3 50:': , 2 O 5 -4 O -4 -2 -6 -6 -10 8 e 22 * SF e -10 O Vien a 3f b T Chinchilla CG CG.N Lops L FCW C 7 C -12 e ' d L.N Giant Spotted GS GS.N C GS.N d Flemish Giant FG FG.N Note: The pointed types -11,o -6 -3 5 3 -8 3 16 * O -2 -2 6 -9 -6 1 -6 -4 O 5 10 * -4 6" -6 -6 -3 15 -5 -8 7 26 * -5 F1 bucks. -61- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens -10 O -1 -23 2 CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Table 5.2. of reference. of N C N 33,O 30,7 C N C 34,3 797 767 741 737 32,7 760 120 142 137 140 151 4,21 4,48 4,43 7239 8081 7603 7774 3,86 142 15,l 4,34 0,38 7674 791 961 911 126 1029 846 38,O 38,9 39,9 37,7 5469 120 5703 128 5275 113 5501 3,17 3,29 3,18 2,99 934 145 38,6 48,7 122 18,2 3,16 0,40 5487 699 41,3 6,53 136 1009 16,s 3,34 0,43 5895 141 4,33 Se N 'C N C N C Se 33,O 4,25 N Se N 764 139 N N 32,6 959 N C N 34,9 N 992 1177 5760 151 143 4,36 36,l 3,70 1084 150 355 3,72 147 5 4,03 0,42 573 586 34,6 118 121 3,41 3,47 580 63 34,7 Se N C N 34,8 N Se 3,7 3,44 120 -62- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes ín crossbreeding: carcass traits (prevalence as% to reference C & N, below). Tab 5.1. Fawn a e SF -10 * 16 -2 a e -11" 11 a f b -6 Q -5 -4 " T b Chinchilla CG C C' CG.N -6 Lops L d C e L.N d Giant Spotted GS b GS.N C c' GS.N d Flemish Giant FG a b FG.N 2* -9 -8 O 5 3Q 5" 3 -8 4 3 1 O O -26 :g -8 -15 -20 * -6 -5 -4 3 7 -5 -4 -7 -7 -8 6 -1 O 5 -4 -10 -11 -9 6 O -6 O 3 -9 -1 -6 -16 -12 *: 6 3 C' 0 . -10 -7 * -4 -10 -2 Q -10 * -8 Q O -19 3 -2 6 -8 -15 g* 5 12 3 O -2 2 5 -30 :k 1 -1 O -8 -6 6" 17 O -4 * -32 * -26 " -10 5 Q of reference. SLW a b C C' d e f Note: The typespointed 2569 2564 2454 2941 2587 2590 2405 GlTW 424 425 389 497 390 238 370 416 445 483 504 621 571 374 60,8 60,O 593 57,O 62,7 56,9 62,O F1 bucks. 34 27 27 33 102 92 96 100 15,5 89,6 table -63- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens see 5. CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Table 6. on C, N, and at Toulouse 1973). T --C N --39 562 6.18 6.18 20,3 90 559 6.75 6.75 15,l 27 73,2 6.8 6.8 71,l 23 57,l 7,55 4,76 37,O 64 63,3 7,95 6,66 16,2 78,6 7,61 6,59 13,4 67,6 7,72 6,2 19,7 % 51 73 7,11 5,83 18,O 84 73p 7,98 6,95 13,l 65 73,1 6,16 5,1 17,l --- 13,2 7,12 5,98 16,O % 62,9 7,49 5,76 23,l 63,5 7,97 68 14,7 753 7,15 6,04 15,6 66,s 7,56 6,19 16.0 C Conc. % WLS % N Conc. % WLS % SP Conc. av. ge % WLS 58.4 6.42 6.42 17.5 55 ge Conc. WLS % --- - 64 - Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Table 7.1. Crossbreeding experiment in selected strains at Toulouse Centre: the 1970 experiment and its replication ten years later. 1970 cc NN C.N WLS 7,31 6,56 -10 % a -25 Yo b 7,44 6,73 -10 YO -23 % WLS 7,77 7,37 -5 % -17 % 7,13 6,17 -13 % -23 % -13 7,70 % % -10 7,94 -167,18 % % C N -236,72 WLS N.C -8 Yo Yo 7,95 -177,32 -21 % -30 % 755 6,OO 3) total of subclasses) 2) 1980 cc -27 7,81 5,71 % 8,08 6,69 -17 % WLS -16 8,26 6,92 % 8,03 6.87 -4 % WLS -13 8,73 YO 8,02 -14 YO C N 7,58 NN C.N N. C 9,16 -8 Yo -21 8,6 Yo WLS Estimated genetic effects 1984,1988) (N) g1 (N) 0,200,08 19705 1980 1970 1980 0.70 WLS -0,98 g" h1 (%) (N) (%) -0,36 * 0,12 *-0.22 0,66 * * -0.12 3 4 :F 11Q 8 :F -4 2 Note: WLS in this case does not Table 7.2. Analysis of mortality from 1970 experiment Table 8.1. A criss-cross experiment 7.1) (table by loglinear model. scheme. 1991). CLASSES of the S E N A S 1 9 7 0 on 4 generations: the and 1980 Q** of the 22>15>13 24>21>19 of *4:4: C<N C>>N C>N 23>20 C<N 17>15 of of 4:'i;'i; of the P, * 'ATGS 4' 1: ns :i;:):* 1 *** NN TT NN TT NN NN TT TT = -65- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens + SF -I-N). CIHEAM - Options Mediterraneennes Table 8.2. A criss-crossexperiment:thecrudebreed effects. N." NN 5N 3N CN 3 7,80 c 5c TT WLS 936 138 97 362 129 127 383 7,81 8,75 7,70 8,lO 7,43 6,88 *X* NN cc m7,99 Se Table 8.3. Criss-cross experiment: genetic effects from corrected data. (additiveeffects expressed as difference C-N;non additive asabsolute). 1033 225 914 2,95 7,61 7.63 * 2,76 ns 5,53 6,46 5,76 5,65 5,98 ,5,10 4,63 WLS WLS *** 5,66 5,28 5,83 Note: g = genetic, h= *I -66- Serie A: Seminaires mediterraneens h1 (N, C) -0,36 -0,16 C) 1,23 Q** 0,41 (N) (N, C) 0,61 +*$ 0,20 (N, C) 0,12 -0,71 0,19 -0,29 WLS 4- g1 (N> -0,54 ** -0,ll ** -0,69 ** C) EST NOT 0,81* EST NOT = (N, C) 1,06 **