Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T18:17:06.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the interaction, with two types of environment, of pure strains or strain crosses of poultry†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

P. Hull ,
R. S. Gowe ,
S. B. Slen  and
R. D. Crawford
P. Hull
Affiliation:
Canada Department of Agriculture, Research Branch, Ottawa, Canada
R. S. Gowe
Affiliation:
Canada Department of Agriculture, Research Branch, Ottawa, Canada
S. B. Slen
Affiliation:
Canada Department of Agriculture, Research Branch, Ottawa, Canada
R. D. Crawford
Affiliation:
Canada Department of Agriculture, Research Branch, Ottawa, Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In these experiments comparisons were made between the magnitude of the interaction of ‘pure’ strains and strain crosses of poultry with two types of environments—location effects and a restricted-feed versus a full-feed rearing programme. The ‘pure’ strains were closed flocks of White Leghorns that had been selected for increased egg production, while the strain crosses were the reciprocal crosses of all combinations of these pure strains. Data from four separate experiments in four consecutive years used for this study involved 8320 laying birds. Six traits of the adult laying birds were used for these analyses.

It was expected that the ‘pure’ strains would differ in performance amongst themselves to a greater extent than the strain crosses, and for the two traits, body-weight at housing and sexual maturity, this was found to be the case in three out of four years. These two traits were affected to the greatest extent by the rearing treatment. Also, the genotype-environment interaction variance was found to be significant and of important magnitude relative to the genetic variance for these two traits. Where the environmental effect was found to be smaller, the interaction variance made up a smaller proportion of the genetic variance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , November 1963 , pp. 370 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

References

REFERENCES

Falconer, D. S. & Latyszewski, M. (1952). The environment in relation to selection for size in mice. J. Genet. 51, 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowe, R. S., Johnson, A. S., Crawford, R. D., Downs, J. H., Hill, A. T., Mountain, W. F., Pelletier, J. R. & Strain, J. H. (1960). Restricted versus full-feeding during the growing period for egg production stock. Brit. Poult. Sci. 1, 37–56.Google Scholar
Gowe, R. S., Lemay, J. A. & Johnson, A. S. (1962). The importance of genotype-environment interactions for quantitative traits involving commercial egg production strains and two rearing programmes—restricted and full-feeding. Proc. XIIth World's Poultry Congress (Section Papers), 43–51.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R. (1959). Design and analysis of animal husbandry experiments. Tech. and Proc. in Anim. Prod., Amer. Soc. of Anim. Prod. 1–55.Google Scholar
Hollands, K. G. & Gowe, R. S. (1961). The effect of restricted and full-feeding during confinement rearing on first and second year laying house performance. Poult. Sci. 40, 574–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, P. & Gowe, R. S. (1962). The importance of interactions detected between genotype and environmental factors for characters of economic significance in poultry. Genetics, 47, 143–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sprague, G. F. & Federer, W. T. (1951). A comparison of variance components in corn yield trials: II Error, year × variety, location × variety, and variety components. Agron. J. 43, 535–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar