Genetic relationship between management units of Czech dam pig breeds based on various types of data and pedigree information
E. Krupa, E. Žáková, Z. Krupová, R. Kasarda, A. Svitákováhttps://doi.org/10.17221/8732-CJASCitation:Krupa E., Žáková E., Krupová Z., Kasarda R., Svitáková A. (2016): Genetic relationship between management units of Czech dam pig breeds based on various types of data and pedigree information. Czech J. Anim. Sci., 61: 91-97.
Knowledge of genetic relationship is an important control mechanism for animal performance-testing schemes. Genetic relationship between and within pig herds was calculated for two dam breeds, Czech Large White (CLW) and Czech Landrace (CLA). The impacts of different field data types (production and reproduction) and various numbers of generations within the pedigrees on genetic relationship were studied. The degree of genetic relationship between analyzed herds was generally low. It ranged from 1.01% (for CLW based on reproduction data and considering three generations of ancestors within the pedigree) to 2.57% (for CLA based on production data with seven generations of ancestors in the pedigree). In contrast, relationship within herds was high and ranged from 16.62% to 44.69% (when three and seven generations within the pedigree were taken into account, respectively), both for production data of the CLA breed. When considering the type of data, an impact on the observed genetic relationship between and within herds was found. Slightly higher genetic relationship between herds was determined in both breeds when using production data (1.64%) compared to reproduction data (1.40%). In contrast, a negligible influence between herds on genetic relationship was found from the number of ancestors’ generations included into the calculations. That was especially so after five or six generations. Our results show that the relationship between herds is population specific and, consequently, must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Knowledge of genetic relationship between and within herds should be taken into account in regard to the complexity of genetic evaluation.Keywords:production data; reproduction data; number of generationsReferences:
Banos G., Cady R.A. (1988): Genetic Relationship Between the United States and Canadian Holstein Bull Populations. Journal of Dairy Science, 71, 1346-1354 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79692-7Colleau Jean-Jacques (2002): An indirect approach to the extensive calculation of relationship coefficients. Genetics Selection Evolution, 34, 409- https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-34-4-409Dodenhoff J., Gotz K.U. (2010): Assessing connectedness among German swine herdbook populations. In: Proc. 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Leipzig, Germany (CD-ROM, Art. No. 813).Fernando R.L., Gianola D., Grossman M. (1983): Identifying All Connected Subsets in a Two-Way Classification Without Interaction. Journal of Dairy Science, 66, 1399-1402 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(83)81951-1Fouilloux M.N., Clement V., Laloe D. (2008): Measuring connectedness among herds in mixed linear models: from theory to practice in large-sized genetic evaluations. Genetics Selection Evolution, 40, 145–159.Foulley JL, Hanocq E, Boichard D (1992): A criterion for measuring the degree of connectedness in linear models of genetic evaluation. Genetics Selection Evolution, 24, 315- https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-24-4-315Hanocq Eric, Boichard Didier (1999): Connectedness in the French Holstein cattle population. Genetics Selection Evolution, 31, 163- https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-31-2-163Kennedy B W, Trus D (1993): Considerations on genetic connectedness between management units under an animal model.. Journal of Animal Science, 71, 2341- https://doi.org/10.2527/1993.7192341xKrupa E., Wolf J. (2013): Simultaneous estimation of genetic parameters for production and litter size traits in Czech Large White and Czech Landrace pigs. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 58, 429–436.Krupa E., Žáková E., Krupová Z. (2015): Evaluation of Inbreeding and Genetic Variability of Five Pig Breeds in Czech Republic. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 28, 25-36 https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.14.0251Lewis R.M., Crump R.E., Simm G., Thompson R. (1999): Assessing connectedness in across-flock genetic evaluations. In: Proc. British Society of Animal Science, Scarborough, UK, 121–122.Mathur P.K., Sullivan B.P., Chesnais J.P. (2002): Measuring connectedness: concept and application to a large industry program. In: Proc. 7th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Montpellier, France, 545–548.Pjontek J., Kadlecik O., Kovacik E., Kasarda R. (2009): Estimation of inbreeding intensity from different quality of pedigree information. Acta Fytotechnica et Zootechnica, 4, 97–99.Roso V. M., Schenkel F. S., Miller S. P. (2004): Degree of connectedness among groups of centrally tested beef bulls. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 84, 37-47 https://doi.org/10.4141/A02-094Salaris S., Fresi P., Casu S. (2009): Evaluation of connectedness in the registered population of the Sardinian dairy sheep breed. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 8, 141–143.Sargolzaei M., Iwaisaki H., Colleau J.J. (2006): CFC: a tool for monitoring genetic diversity. In: Proc. 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 27–28.Uimari P., Tapio M. (): Extent of linkage disequilibrium and effective population size in Finnish Landrace and Finnish Yorkshire pig breeds. Journal of Animal Science, 89, 609-614 https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3249Wolf J., Smital J. (2009): Effects in genetic evaluation for semen traits in Czech Large White and Czech Landrace boars. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 58, 349–358.Wolf J., Zakova E., Groeneveld E. (2005): Genetic parameters for a joint genetic evaluation of production and reproduction traits in pigs. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 50, 96–103.Zhang H., Liu X.H., Wang C., Li J.Q., Chen Y.S. (2004): Study on the measures of connectedness between herds. Agricultural Sciences in China, 3, 143–148.