Genetic Aspects of Feed Efficiency in Broilers

Wilson, S. P.

doi:10.3382/ps.0480487

Cited by 42 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…in the line selected for low conversion ratio and decreased 109 gms. in Wilson (1969), using the same randombred base population that we used, concluded that selection for improved feed conversion would produce a bird that gained slower, consumed less feed but converted feed to body tissue somewhat more efficiently than those birds produced by selection for gain. In our study, the one generation of selection for improved feed conversion in the randombred population produced progeny that ate slightly less feed with a more efficient conversion ratio.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Fox and Bohren (1954) found a correlation between gain and efficiency of +.60 and concluded there is little justification for commercial breeders to select on the basis of food requirements. Wilson (1969) reported a phenotypic correlation of -.52 (difference in sign is due to arrangement of traits in the ratio) between efficiency and consumption. Similar high correlations between gain and feed efficiency have been reported for steers (Winters and McMahon, 1933;Fitzhugh and Cartwright, 1971), swine (Dickerson and Grimes, 1947), and mice (Sutherland et al, 1970).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic Changes in Efficiency of Feed Utilization of Chicks Maintaining Body Weight Constant

Guill

Washburn

1974

Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selection based on individual feed conversion ratio was made for three generations in a chicken population previously selected for rate of growth and for one generation in a randombred population which had not been selected for rate of growth. Two sets of high (HL) and two sets of low (LL) feed conversion ratio lines were selected in each population: one set selected so that body weight was constant over generations (HLWK, LLWK), while in the other set (HLWV, LLWV) body weight was allowed to vary.In the three generations of selection in the chicken population the units of feed required for a unit of gain was increased .12 in the HLWV line over that of non-selected controls and .08 in the HLWK line. In the low feed conversion ratio lines the units of feed required for a unit of gain was decreased .11 in the LLWK line and .07 in the LLWV line. In both low lines more progress was made in females than in males. In the randombred stock, which had no previous selection for growth, as much progress in lowering the feed conversion ratio was made in one generation of selection as was made in three generations in the broiler population (decreased .12 in the LLWK and .13 in the LLWV) with no sex difference in response.The realized heritabilities for feed conversion for the lines selected from the broiler population were .20, .21, .33 and .26 for the LLWV, LLWK, HLWV, HLWK, respectively. In the lines selected from the randombred population the realized heritabilities were .56, .45, .35 and .31, respectively.The magnitude of the heritability values obtained indicate that even in lines previously selected for growth there is sufficient variation in efficiency of feed utilization to allow progress in selection without further change in body weight.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Genetic Changes in Efficiency of Feed Utilization of Chicks Maintaining Body Weight Constant

Guill

Washburn

1974

Poultry Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In retrospect, this void is understandable because implementation of the laboratory experiments in a world of large numbers and multistage selection was lacking in both what and when to measure. Meanwhile, further evidence that feed efficiency responded to selection came from laboratories in the United States (39,40) and Australia (41). The public scientific base showed a heritable trait but not how it could be implemented.…”

Section: Coming Of Agementioning

confidence: 97%

Evolution of the Modern Broiler and Feed Efficiency

Siegel

2014

Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci.

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the chicken was domesticated during the Neolithic period, the development of the modern broiler is a recent event that has occurred within the past 100 years. The chicken's adaptability has allowed it to be grown globally under a range of husbandry conditions. That is, the same genetic stock may be found in a range of environments, where it is noted for rapid growth to market weight and efficiency of feed use, which has increased dramatically, mainly through genetic selection. Under good husbandry and a high-energy diet, at 35 days of age a 1.40-kg broiler required 3.22 kg of feed in 1985. Twenty-five years later, we have a 2.44-kg broiler produced on 3.66 kg of feed. This review attempts to address the history of factors contributing to these changes, obstacles that have had to be overcome, and future limitations.

show abstract

“…Since selection intensity applied to males is usually very much higher than that applied to females, testing only the males would utilise limiting resources more efficiently. Furthermore, since there is a moderately large positive correlation between 4-to 6-and 8-to 10-week body weight (Siegel, 1963;Merritt, 1966;Wilson, 1969;Pym and Nicholls, 1979), preliminary selection of males on the basis of 4-or 5-week weight could be exercised, and only the best males tested in single cages for individual food consumption. Obviously a reduction in the number of chickens tested decreases the selection intensity, but provided the proportion of males tested is not too small, the loss should not be very significant since those selected for testing probably have the higher indices.…”

Section: Predicted Responses To Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The last set was derived from the results of Fox and Bohren (1954), Thomas et al (1958), Siegel (1962), Merritt (1966), Goto (1968), Kinney (1969), Wilson (1969), Pym (1971), Guill and Washburn (1974) and Pym and Nicholls (1979). The base population estimates of Pym and Nicholls were estimated by averaging over sexes, taking combined sire and dam component estimates for genetic variances and covariances.…”

Section: Selection Index Calculationsmentioning

confidence: 99%