Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-07T22:40:05.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of three muscling Quantitative Trait Loci on growth patterns of crossbred lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2017

N R Lambe ,
J M Macfarlane ,
A Masri ,
O Matika ,
W Haresign  and
L Bunger
N R Lambe*
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
J M Macfarlane
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
A Masri
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
O Matika
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
W Haresign
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom
L Bunger
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
*
Email: Nicola.Lambe@sac.ac.uk
Get access

Extract

Texel Muscling QTL (TM-QTL) and LoinMaxTM (LM-QTL) are located on chromosome 18 in Texel and Poll Dorset sheep, respectively, and have been shown to positively affect muscling of the loin in crossbred lambs carrying one copy of the QTL (Macfarlane et al., 2008, Masri et al., 2009). MyoMaxTM (MM-QTL), found on chromosome 2 of Texel sheep, increases muscling and decreases fatness in lambs of different genetic backgrounds (Campbell and McLaren, 2007). No differences in live weights, carcass weights or growth rates have been associated with these QTL to date. However, there is further need to investigate the effects of the three QTL on growth patterns in commercial crossbred populations, where fast-growing slaughter lambs of good carcass weights and quality are a prerequisite.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2009 , April 2009 , pp. 40
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2009

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

Campbell, A.W. and McLaren, R.J. 2007. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production. 67, 160–162.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, J.M., Lambe, N.R., Bishop, S.C., Matika, O., Rius Vilarrasa, E., McLean, K.A., Haresign, W., Wolf, B.T., McLaren, R.J. and Bünger, L. 2008. Animal. in press.Google Scholar
Payne, R.W., Murray, D.M., Harding, S.A., Baird, D.B. and Soutar, D.M. 2005. GenStat for Windows (8th Edition) Introduction. VSN International, Hemel Hempstead.Google Scholar
Masri, A, Macfarlane, J.M., Lambe, N.R., Haresign, W., Rius Vilarrasa, E. and Bünger, L. 2009. BSAS Proceedings, 41 Google Scholar
Renne, U., Langhammer, M., Wytrwat, E., Dietl, G. and Bünger, L. 2003. Journal of Experimental Animal Science. 42, 218–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar