Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T08:56:26.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of sire genotype on lamb performance at weaning in extensive sheep systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2018

H. F. Elizalde ,
A. F. Carson  and
C. Muñoz
H. F. Elizalde*
Affiliation:
Centro Regional de Investigaciones INIA Tamel Aike, Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Casilla de Correos 296, Coyhaique, Región de Aysen, Chile
A. F. Carson
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Room 650 A Dundonald House, Upper Newtonards Road, Belfast BT4 3SB, UK
C. Muñoz
Affiliation:
Centro Regional de Investigaciones INIA Remehue, Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Casilla de Correos 24-0, Osorno, Región de los Lagos, Chile
*
†E-mail: helizald@inia.cl
Get access

Abstract

A low finishing weight and poor carcass characteristics are major causes of lower incomes in extensive sheep flocks; however, the use of terminal sire crossbreeding would improve lamb performance and carcass traits under these conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate sire breed effects on the performance of lambs born to Corriedale ewes in extensive sheep systems in Western Patagonia. A total of 10 Corriedale, 10 Dorset, nine Suffolk and seven Texel sires, 16 of which were under a genetic recorded scheme and 20 selected from flocks not participating in genetic improvement programmes, were used across six commercial farms for 2 successive years. Data were collected from 685 lambs of the four resulting genotypes. Overall, Corriedale lambs were 0.47 kg lighter at birth than crossbred lambs (P<0.001). Suffolk and Texel sired lambs required more assistance (P<0.01) at birth than Corriedale or Dorset sired lambs, with Suffolk sired lambs requiring the most assistance (8%). Ewes sired with Suffolk rams had larger (P<0.05) litters than ewes sired with Texel or Corriedale rams. Lamb live weight gain from birth to weaning was higher (P<0.001) in crossbred lambs compared with Corriedale lambs, therefore, crossbred lambs averaged 2.9 kg heavier BW (P<0.001) than Corriedale lambs. A significant sire breed x sire source interaction was detected for lamb live weight gain (P<0.05) and lamb live weight at weaning (P<0.01), showing that the heaviest lambs were from recorded sires, except for Suffolk crossbred lambs. Mortality rate to weaning was increased (P<0.05) in Suffolk cross lambs (31%), with Corriedale lambs showing the lowest (17%) mortality. Terminal sire breeds increased (P<0.001) cold carcass weight, with 13.8, 16.0, 15.2 and 14.9 kg for the Corriedale, Dorset, Suffolk and Texel sired lambs, respectively. Carcass length, kidney knob and channel fat, fat grade, grade rule and fat depth measurements were not affected by sire breed (P>0.05). Carcass conformation was higher in Texel sired lambs compared with Corriedale lambs (P<0.05), with Dorset and Suffolk sired lambs being intermediate. Crossbred lambs showed a greater (P<0.001) eye muscle than Corriedale. Commercial cuts were affected by sire breed, as a result of the Corriedale lambs being smaller and having lighter carcass than crossbred lambs. Significant improvement in lamb weights at weaning and carcass traits could be expected when using a terminal sire on Corriedale ewes in Western Patagonia. However, no advantages were detected with the use of recorded sires under these production systems.

Keywords

crossbreedinggrowthcarcass compositionlamb survivalsheep
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 213 - 220
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abella, I, Cardellino, RC, Mueller, J, Cardellino, RA, Benítez, D and Lira, R 2010. South American sheep and wool industries. In International Sheep and Wool Handbook (ed. DJ Cottle), pp 85–94. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Adler, PB, Milchunas, DG, Sala, OE, Burke, IC and Laurenroth, WK 2005. Plant traits and ecosystem grazing effects: comparison of U.S. sagebush steppe and Patagonian steppe. Ecological Applications 15, 774–792.Google Scholar
Álvarez, M, Rodríguez Iglesias, RM, García Vinent, J, Giorgetti, H and Baselga, M 2010. Introduction of meat sheep breeds in extensive systems of Patagonia: lamb growth and survival. Journal of Animal Science 88, 1256–1266.Google Scholar
Álvarez, JM, Rodríguez Iglesias, RM, García Vinent, J, Giorgetti, H, Rodríguez, G and Baselga, M 2013. Introduction of sheep meat breeds in extensive systems: lamb carcass characteristics. Small Ruminant Research 109, 9–14.Google Scholar
Bianchi, G and Garibotto, G 2009. Uso de razas carniceras en cruzamientos terminales y su impacto en la producción de carne y el resultado económico. In Alternativas tecnológicas para la producción de carne ovina de calidad en sistemas pastoriles (ed. G Bianchi), pp. 65–106. Editorial Hemisferio Sur, Montevideo, Uruguay.Google Scholar
Bianchi, G, Garibotto, G and Betancur, O 2001. Lamb survival, growth characteristics, carcass weight and GR values in pure Corriedale, Hampshire Down, Southdown and Suffolk sired heavy lambs. Archivos de Medicina Veterinaria 33, 261–268.Google Scholar
Carson, AF, Irwin, D and Kilpatrick, DJ 2001. A comparison of Scottish Blackface and Cheviot ewes and five sire breeds in terms of lamb output at weaning in hill sheep systems. The Journal of Agricultural Science 137, 221–233.Google Scholar
Claro, D. 1978. Reproducción de los ovinos en Magallanes. II. Tasa de mortalidad de ovejas y corderos. Agricultura Técnica 38, 73–77.Google Scholar
Cruickshank, GJ, Muir, PD, MacLean, KS, Goodger, TM and Hickson, C 1996. Growth and carcass characteristics of lambs sired by Texel, Oxford Down and Suffolk rams. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 56, pp. 201–204.Google Scholar
Dawson, LER and Carson, AF 2002. Effects of crossbred ewe genotype and ram genotype on ewe prolificacy, lamb viability and lamb output in the lowland sector. Journal of Agricultural Science 139, 169–181.Google Scholar
Dawson, LER, Carson, AF, Mc Clinton, LOW, Kilpatrick, DJ and Moss, BW 2003. Comparison of the carcass characteristics and meat quality of lambs produced from Texel and Rouge de l’Ouest ewes and their crosses. Animal Science 77, 57–65.Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM 2003. Behavioural development in the neonatal lamb: effect of maternal and birth-related factors. Therogeneology 59, 1027–1050.Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM and Bünger, L. 2012. Factors affecting dystocia and offspring vigour in different sheep genotypes. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 103, 257–264.Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM and Lawrence, AB. 1998. Variability in the expression of maternal behaviour in primiparous sheep: effects of genotype and litter size. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58, 311–330.Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM, Lawrence, AB, Brown, HE and Simm, G. 1996. Effect of ewe and lamb genotype on gestation length, lambing ease and neonatal behaviour of lambs. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 8, 11123–11129.Google Scholar
Freking, BA, Leymaster, KA and Young, LD 2000. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel and Mondale breeds of sheep: I. Effects of ram breed on productivity of ewes of two crossbred populations. Journal of Animal Science 78, 1422–1429.Google Scholar
Gallivan, C, Kemp, RA, Berger, YM and Young, LD 1993. Comparison of Finnish Landrace and Romanov as prolific breeds in a terminal – sire crossbreeding system. Journal of Animal Science 71, 2910–2918.Google Scholar
Hanrahan, JP 1999. Genetic and non – genetic factors affecting lamb growth and carcass quality (End Project Reports: Sheep series No. 8. Teagasc Athenry Research Centre, Galway, Ireland.Google Scholar
Hepp, C 1996. Praderas de la zona austral: XI Región (Aysén). In Praderas para Chile (ed. I Ruiz), pp. 624–638. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, INIA, Chile.Google Scholar
Hinch, GN and Brien, F. 2014. Lamb survival in Australian flocks: a review. Animal Production Science 54, 656–666.Google Scholar
Hopkins, DL and Fogarty, NM 1998. Diverse lamb genotypes – 1. Yield of saleable cuts and meat in the carcass and the prediction of yield. Meat Science 49, 459–475.Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Normalización 1978. Canales de ovino. NCh 1364-78. INN, Santiago, Chile.Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Normalización 2000. Cortes de carne de ovino. NCH 1595. INN, Santiago, Chile.Google Scholar
Jones, HE, Lewis, RM, Young, MJ, Wolf, BT and Warkup, CC 2002. Changes in muscularity with growth and its relationship with other carcass traits in three terminal sire breeds of sheep. Animal Science 74, 265–275.Google Scholar
Jopson, NB, Newman, SAN and McEwan, JC 2009. Developments in the sheep meat industry: Genetic evaluation of meat yield. Proceeding of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 69, 161–164.Google Scholar
Kelly, RW 1992. Lamb mortality and growth to weaning in commercial Merino Flocks in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43, 1399–1416.Google Scholar
Kirton, AH, Duganzich, DM, Mercer, GJK, Clarke, JN, Dobbie, JL and Wilson, JA 1997. Muscle distribution in lamb progeny from several breeds. Proceeding of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 57, 267–270.Google Scholar
Kirton, AH and Johnson, DL 1979. Interrelationship between GR and other lamb carcass fatness measurements. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 39, 194–201.Google Scholar
Kremer, R, Barbato, G, Castro, L, Rista, L, Roses, L, Herrera, V and Neirotti, V 2004. Effect of sire breed, year, sex and weight on carcass characteristics of lambs. Small Ruminant Research 53, 117–124.Google Scholar
Latorre, E 2004. La experiencia de Magallanes (Chile) en cruzamientos ovinos terminales: Implicancias y Perspectivas. In La Producción Ovina de Aysén en un mundo globalizado, Acta N° 33 (ed. HF Elizalde), Centro Regional de Investigación Tamel Aike, Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Coyhaique, Chile.Google Scholar
Leeds, TD, Notter, DR, Leymaster, KA, Mousel, MR and Lewis, GS 2011. Evaluation of Columbia, USMARC – Composite, Suffolk and Texel rams as terminal sires in an extensive rangeland production system: I. Ewe productivity and crossbred lamb survival and preweaning growth. Journal of Animal Science 90, 2931–2940.Google Scholar
Leymaster, KA and Jenkins, TG 1993. Comparison of Texel and Suffolk – sired crossbred lambs for survival, growth and compositional traits. Journal of Animal Science 71, 859–869.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, JM, Matheson, SM and Dwyer, CM 2010. Genetic parameters for birth difficulty, lamb vigour and lamb sucking ability in Suffolk sheep. Animal Welfare 19, 99–105.Google Scholar
Marquez, GC, Haresign, W, Davies, MH, Emmans, GC, Roehe, R, Bünger, L, Simm, G and Lewis, RM 2012. Index selection in terminal sires improves early lamb growth. Journal of Animal Science 90, 142–151.Google Scholar
Mousel, MR, Notter, DR, Leeds, TD, Zerby, HN, Moeller, SJ and Lewis, GS 2012. Evaluation of Columbia, USMARC-Composite, Suffolk, and Texel rams as terminal sires in an extensive rangeland production system: III. Prefabrication carcass traits and organ weights. Journal of Animal Science 90, 2953–2962.Google Scholar
Payne, RW, Murray, DA, Harding, SA, Baird, DB and Soutar, DM 2007. GenStat for Windows, 10th ed. Introduction. VSN International, Hemel Hempstead, UK.Google Scholar
Ruíz de Huidobro, F, Cañeque, V, Onega, E and Velasco, S 2000. Morfología de la canal ovina. In Metodología para el estudio de la calidad de la canal y de la carne en rumiantes (ed. V Cañeque and C Sañudo), pp. 82–102. Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria, Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar
Russel, AJF, Doney, JM and Gunn, RG 1969. Subjective assessment of body fat in live sheep. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 72, 451–454.Google Scholar
Sales, F 2005. Ultrasonografía en ovinos: optimizando el uso de las praderas, boletín 132. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Punta Arenas, Chile.Google Scholar
Scales, GH, Bray, AR, Baird, DB, O’Connell, D and Knight, TL 2000. Effect of sire breed on growth, carcass and wool characteristics of lambs born to Merino ewes in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 43, 93–100.Google Scholar
Schmidova, J, Milerski, M, Svitakova, A, Vostra Vydrova, H and Vostry, L 2016. The influence of ram on number of born and weaned lambs on Suffolk. Paper presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science, 29 August–2 September 2016, Belfast UK, poster 11, session 38.Google Scholar
Shackelford, SD, Leymaster, KA, Wheeler, TL and Koohmaraie, M 2012. Effects of breed of sire on carcass composition and sensory traits of lambs. Journal of Animal Science 90, 4131–4139.Google Scholar
Squella, F, González, L and Quezada, M 2007. Los Animales y su Manejo. In Técnicas de Producción Ovina para el Secano Mediterráneo de la VI Región (ed. F Squella), pp. 91–120. Boletín INIA N° 166. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, Centro Regional de Investigación Rayentué, Litueche, Chile.Google Scholar
Utrilla, V and Jaurena, G 2017. Productividad y calidad nutricional de especies forrajeras típicas en mallines de la Patagonia Austral (Argentina). Revista Argentina de Producción Animal 37, 1–6.Google Scholar
Young, MJ and Wakelin, R 2009. SIL – progress over a decade. Proceeding of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 69, 148–152.Google Scholar