Non-random mating for selection with restricted rates of inbreeding and overlapping generations

A.K. Sonesson, T.H.E. Meuwissen

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    28 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Minimum coancestry mating with a maximum of one offspring per mating pair (MC1) is compared with random mating schemes for populations with overlapping generations. Optimum contribution selection is used, whereby $\\Delta F$ is restricted. For schemes with $\\Delta F$ restricted to 0.25% per year, 256 animals born per year and heritability of 0.25, genetic gain increased with 18% compared with random mating. The effect of MC1 on genetic gain decreased for larger schemes and schemes with a less stringent restriction on inbreeding. Breeding schemes hardly changed when omitting the iteration on the generation interval to find an optimum distribution of parents over age-classes, which saves computer time, but inbreeding and genetic merit fluctuated more before the schemes had reached a steady-state. When bulls were progeny tested, these progeny tested bulls were selected instead of the young bulls, which led to increased generation intervals, increased selection intensity of bulls and increased genetic gain (35% compared to a scheme without progeny testing for random mating). The effect of MC1 decreased for schemes with progeny testing. MC1 mating increased genetic gain from 11-18% for overlapping and 1-4% for discrete generations, when comparing schemes with similar genetic gain and size.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)23-39
    JournalGenetics, Selection, Evolution
    Volume34
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2002

    Keywords

    • Genetic response
    • Mating
    • Optimum contribution
    • Overlapping generations
    • Rate of inbreeding
    • Selection

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Non-random mating for selection with restricted rates of inbreeding and overlapping generations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this