Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T23:37:52.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of fixed effect model and prior estimates on sire ranking in a suffolk sire referencing scheme

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2017

G.E. Pollott  and
D.R. Guy
G.E. Pollott
Affiliation:
Wye College-University of London, Ashford, Kent, TN25 5AH
D.R. Guy
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, P.O.Box 44, Winterhill, Milton Keynes, MK6 1AX
Get access

Extract

Terminal Sire breeds have a considerable impact on lamb production in Britain’s stratified cross-breeding sheep industry. MLC (1988) estimated that 69% of lambs used for meat production are sired by the Terminal Sire breeds. The predominant Terminal Sire breed is the Suffolk, comprising 46% of the ram population in Britain. The genetic improvement of meat production characters has, traditionally, been difficult in this breed due to the large number of small flocks making up the breed, the restriction on AI use and the lack of a cost/effective central testing facility. However, the formation of the Suffolk Sire-Referencing Scheme Ltd (SSRS), in 1989, has provided a vehicle for faster genetic progress in the breed.

Type
Sheep Production
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (1972) , Volume 1992 , March 1992 , pp. 22
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1992

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

Groeneveld, E., Kovac, M. and Wang, T. (1990) Proc. 4th World Congress Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 13: 488. Google Scholar
Meyer, K. (1985) Biometrics 41: 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MLC (1988) Sheep in Britain. MLC: Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Simm, G. and Dingwall, W.S. (1989) Livestock Production Science, 21: 223–233.Google Scholar