It is generally presumed that allosucking brings benefits to the allosucking infants. Nevertheless, the data supporting such a presumption are rare. The aim of the study was to determine whether allosucking has any impact on growth rates of the allosucking calves. Fifty pregnant hinds were observed between 28 May (1st day of calving) and 2 September (abrupt weaning of all calves) on a red deer farm at Vimperk, South Bohemia, the Czech Republic. Of the 50 calves born the growth curve was calculated for 39 calves. During their 1st month of life these calves were observed in 1015 sucking bouts. In 690 cases the calves sucked from maternal hinds and in 325 cases non-maternal hinds. Only 25·64% of calves sucked exclusively from maternal hinds. The prevailing type of sucking behaviour was a combination of sucking from maternal hinds and allosucking (74·36%). Calves sucking from maternal and non-maternal hinds showed 1·6-fold higher sucking frequency than did calves feeding from maternal hinds only. Our results indicate that to some extend allonursing behaviour of the hind may affect their calves’ feeding behaviour. The more non-filial calves the maternal hind nursed, the higher frequency of the sucking by their calves occurred. The groups of calves did not differ in birth weight. With increasing age, the relative body weight increased faster in calves sucking maternal hinds only than in calves sucking maternal and non-maternal hinds. This gain in body weight was not essentially influenced by the fact whether or not the calf’s maternal hind nursed non-filial or exclusively filial calves. However, at weaning (99 days), the lowest body weight occurred in allosucking calves whose maternal hinds were allonursing. The results suggest that allosucking does not mean an extra profit to the allosucker. Instead, in our subjects, allosucking was rather attributed to compensation of nutritional requirements based on a combination of various factors, such as discrete differences in body weight at birth and also later and allonursing of the maternal hind.
Summary Starting with the consideration of a two‐locus system of a diploid organism, a general model for crossbreeding parameters, including additive, dominance, additive × additive, additive × dominance and dominance × dominance effects, is derived. A general procedure for the calculation of the coefficients of the crossbreeding parameters is described. As the number of parameters in the general model is high, reparametrization conditions must be introduced to reduce this number. The derivation of 13 models for two source populations known from the literature is demonstrated. Four new models for a detailed analysis of epistatic effects in crossbreeding plans with more than two source populations are presented. An example from cattle breeding is given. Problems connected with the reparametrization and the estimation of effects are discussed. Zusammenfassung Kreuzungszucht bei Nutztieren. V. Analyse von Kreuzungsplänen mit sekundären Kreuzungsgenerationen Ausgehend von der Betrachtung eines Zweilokus‐Systems eines diploiden Organismus wird ein allgemeines Modell für Kreuzungsparameter abgeleitet, das additive, dominante, additiv × additive, additiv × dominante und dominant × dominante Effekte enthält. Eine allgemeine Methode zur Berechnung der Koeffizienten der Kreuzungsparameter wird beschrieben. Da die Anzahl der Parameter im allgemeinen Modell hoch ist, müssen Reparametrisierungsbedingungen eingeführt werden, um diese Anzahl zu senken. Die Ableitung von 13 Modellen für zwei Ausgangspopulationen, die aus der Literatur bekannt sind, wird demonstriert. Vier neue Modelle für eine detaillierte Analyse von epistatischen Effekten in Kreuzungsplänen mit mehr als zwei Ausgangspopulationen werden vorgestellt. Ein Beispiel aus der Rinderzüchtung wird angeführt. Probleme, die mit der Reparametrisierung und der Schätzung der Effekte zusammenhängen, werden diskutiert.
This paper compares the growth patterns of chickens, turkeys, ducks and geese. The growth curves and their parameters were estimated by the Richards function. In this work, weight data of females of current sire lines (62 chickens, 47 ducks and 42 geese) and commercial medium-type hybrids (27 turkeys) were used. Birds were fed ad libitum and weighed at 7 or 14 d intervals up to 18-28 weeks of age. The accuracy of the curve fit was high in all species (R 2 = 0.9840 to 0.9994). The ratios y + /A (weight at the inflection point over mature weight), which determine the shape of the growth curve, were 0.370, 0.358, 0.407 and 0.261 in chickens, turkeys, ducks and geese, respectively. Only the growth pattern of the Galliforms did not significantly differ from the Gompertz type of growth (y + /A = 0.368). The age at the inflection point confirmed the high early growth of geese (t + = 21.1 d) and ducks (t + = 25.5 d). The chickens finished the autoacceleration phase of growth at 47.7 d and turkeys at 74.0 d of age. The phenotypic correlations between the inflection parameters t + and y + were higher in waterfowl than in chickens and turkeys. The inflection parameter t + and y + were positively associated with the maturing index k in ducks and geese, and negatively in chickens and turkeys. The evolutionary aspects of the interspecific differences are discussed. growth curve / turkey / waterfowl / chicken / evolution Résumé-Étude comparative des courbes de croissance de volaille. L'article compare les patrons de croissance du poulet, de la dinde, du canard et de l'oie. Les courbes de croissance et leurs paramètres ont été estimés selon l'équation de Richards. L'analyse a porté sur les poids de femelles de lignées paternelles courantes (62 poulets, 47 canards et 42 oies) et de 27 dindes (hybrides commerciaux de type moyen). Les oiseaux ont été nourris ad libitum et pesés régulièrement jusqu'à l'âge de 18 à 28 sem. La précision de l'ajustement des courbes est élevée pour les !! espèces (R 2 = 0,9840 à 0,9994). Le rapport y + /A (poids au point d'inflexion sur poids adulte) qui définit la forme de la courbe de croissance est de 0,370, 0,358, 0,407 et 0,261 pour le poulet, la dinde, le canard et l'oie respectivement. Seul le patron de croissance des Galliformes ne diffère pas significativement de la fonction de Gompertz (y + /A = 0, 368). L'âge au point d'inflexion confirme la précocité de croissance de l'oie (t + = 21, 1 j) et du canard (t + = 25, 5 j). La période d'auto-accélération de la croissance dure 47,7 j chez le poulet et 74 j chez la dinde. Les corrélations phénotypiques entre les paramètres d'inflexion t + et y + sont plus élevées chez le canard et l'oie que chez le poulet et la dinde. Les liaisons entre les paramètres d'inflexion t + et y + et l'index de maturation k sont positives chez le canard et l'oie et négatives chez le poulet et la dinde. Les aspects évolutifs des différences interspécifiques sont discutés dans l'article.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.