Full text in pdf format

 

Effect of type of cross on litter size and litter weight of purebred and crossbred swine*

 

 

Martinho de Almeida e SilvaI; Antônio Batista SanceveroII; Rafael Geraldo de Oliveira AlvesIII; Antônio Ilson Gomes de OliveiraIV; Paulo Sávio LopesI; Roberto Augusto de Almeida Torres JúniorI

IDepartamento de Zootecnia, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Av. Peter Henry Holfs, s/no., 36570-000 Viçosa, MG, Brasil. Send correspondence to M.A.S.
IIRezende Alimentos S.A.
IIIEmpresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (EMBRAPA)/Centro Nacional de Pesquisa de Gado de Corte (CNPGC)
IVDepartamento de Zootecnia, Escola Superior de Agricultura de Lavras, Lavras, MG, Brasil

 

 

ABSTRACT

Data on 321 litters from the first three gestations of purebred and single crosses of Duroc (D), Landrace (L), Yorkshire (Y) and Large White (LW) swine were analyzed by least squares to evaluate the effects of breed, general combining ability, specific combining ability, maternal and reciprocal effects and total and specific heterosis on total number of piglets at birth (TNPB), number of piglets alive at birth (NPAB), at 21 days (NP21), at weaning (NP35) and at the end of the growth period (NP 77) as well as litter weight at birth (LWB), at 21 days (LW21), at weaning (LW35) and at the end of the growth period (LW77). Purebred Large White litters had a better performance than Duroc litters for traits: NPAB, NP21 and NP35. Breed significantly affected LW35, though there were no differences among L, LW and Y breeds, which had heavier litters compared to Duroc. There was no significant effect of general combining ability either on litter size or litter weight. Specific combining ability significantly affected only LWB. Better performance was observed for D x Y and L x LW crosses. Maternal effect had no significant effect on litter size traits, but significantly affected LWB, LW21 and LW35. Lower litter weights were observed for LW breed (LWB) and D breed (LW21 and LW35). Reciprocal effect and total heterosis did not affect any of the traits. Significant effects of specific heterosis (P < 0.05) were observed only for D x Y crosses, with estimated values of 21.84% (LW35) and 22.50% (LW77).

Keywords: cross size; litter size; litter weight; purebred swine; crossbred swine.

 

 

REFERENCES

Bereskin, B., Hetzer, H.O., Peters, W.H. and Norton, H.W. (1974). Genetic and maternal effects on pre-weaning traits in crosses on high and low-fat lines of swine. J. Anim. Sci. 39: 1-10.

Bichard, M. and Smith, W.C. (1971). Crossbreeding and genetic improvement. In: Proceedings of the 18th Easter School in Agricultural Science, March, 29 to April, 1 (Cole, D.J.A., ed.). University of Nottingham, England, pp. 37-52.

Craft, W.A. (1958). Fifty years of progress in swine breeding. J. Anim. Sci. 17: 960-980.

Dickerson, G.E., Lush, J.L. and Culbertson, C.C. (1946). Hybrid vigor in single crosses between inbred lines of Poland China swine. J. Anim. Sci. 5: 16-24.

Eisen, E.J., Horstgen-Schwark, G., Saxton, A.M. and Bandy, T.R. (1983). Genetic interpretation and analysis of diallel crosses with animals. Theor. Appl. Genet. 65: 17-23.

English, P.R. and Morrison, V. (1984). Causes and prevention of piglet mortality. Pig News and Information 5: 369-375.

Fahmy, M.H. and Bernard, C. (1971). Causes of mortality in Yorkshire pigs from birth to 20 weeks of age. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 351-359.

Griffing, B. (1956). Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing systems. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 9: 465-493.

Hale, O.M., Bondari, K. and Cleveland, E.R. (1986). Sex ratio, growth and survival of Duroc, Hampshire and crossbred pigs. In: 3rd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production. Lincoln, Nebraska, USA, pp. 63-69.

Harvey, W. (1968). Least-squares analysis of data with unequal subclass numbers. A.R.S.-USDA, Washington, D.C., pp. 157.

Hayman, B.I. (1954). The analysis of variance of diallel tables. Biometrics 10: 235-244.

Johnson, R.K. (1981). Crossbreeding in swine: Experimental results. J. Anim. Sci. 52: 906-923.

Nelson, R.E. and Robison, O.W. (1976). Comparisons of specific two and three-way crosses of swine. J. Anim. Sci. 42: 1150-1157.

O'Ferrall, G.J.M., Hetzel, H.D. and Gaines, J.A. (1968). Heterosis in preweaning traits of swine. J. Anim. Sci. 27: 17-21.

Oliveira, A.I.G. (1988). Aspectos genéticos das características de classificação e dissecação de carcaças de suínos em cruzamentos dialéticos. Doctoral thesis, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, pp. 97.

Rostagno, M.S., Silva; D.J., Costa, P.M.A., Fonseca, J.B., Soares, P.R., Pereira, J.A.A. and Silva, M.A. (1983). Composição de Alimentos e Exigências Nutricionais de Suínos e Aves (Tabelas Brasileiras). Imprensa Universitária, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, MG, pp. 60.

Schneider, J.F. (1976). Heterosis, combining abilities and maternal ability estimated from single-crosses among four breeds of swine. Master's thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, pp. 107.

Schneider, J.F. (1978). Individual and maternal heterosis estimated from single-crosses and backcrosses of swine. Ph.D. thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, pp. 128.

Smith, C. and King, J.W.B. (1964). Crossbreeding and litter production in British pigs. Anim. Prod. 6: 265-271.

Sprague, G.F. and Tatum, L.D. (1942). General vs. specific combining ability in single-crosses of corn. J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 34: 923-932.

Stell, R.G.D. and Torrie, J.H. (1960). Principles and Procedures of Statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, pp. 481.

Young, L.D., Johnson, R.K. and Omtvedt, I.T. (1976). Reproductive performance of swine bred to produce purebred and two-breed cross litters. J. Anim. Sci. 42: 1133-1149.

 

 

* Part of a thesis presented by A.B.S. to the Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV) in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctoral degree.