Terminal Traits IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heterosis Review What is Heterosis - offspring performance difference over the average performance of an offspring’s parents Why maximize heterosis? It is FREE producers are wasting money if you do not take advantage of it. Performance of Sire = 2.00 ADG of Dam= 1.80 ADG Parental Average = 1.90 Offspring Average ADG = 2.10 Offspring – Parental Average = 2.10 – 1.90 = .20 Percent Heterosis = .20 /1.90 = 10.5% IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Types of Heterosis 1. Individual Advantage of a crossbred offspring over purebred parents 2. Maternal Advantage of a crossbred mother over a purebred mother Primarily due to mothering ability 3. Paternal Advantage of a crossbred father over a purebred father Due to fathering ability? Not as important as maternal heterosis IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heterosis advantage for production traits Item First Cross purebred sow (Ahlschwede et al., 1988) Multiple cross crossbred sow Crossbred boar Reproduction Conception rate 0.0 8.0 10.0 Pigs born alive 0.5 8.0 0.0 Littersize at 21 days 9.0 23.0 0.0 10.0 24.0 0.0 Littersize weaned IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heterosis advantage for production traits Item First Cross purebred sow (Ahlschwede et al., 1988) Multiple cross crossbred sow Crossbred boar Production 21 – day litter weight 10.0 27.0 0.0 Days to 250 lbs. 7.5 7.0 0.0 Feed Efficiency 2.0 1.0 0.0 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heterosis advantage for production traits Item First Cross purebred sow (Ahlschwede et al., 1988) Multiple cross crossbred sow Crossbred boar Carcass Composition Length 0.3 0.5 0.0 Backfat -2.0 -2.0 0.0 Loin muscle area 1.0 2.0 0.0 Marbling 0.3 1.0 0.0 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Crossbreeding Systems Rotational crossbreeding systems Three-breed IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Types of Crossbreeding Systems Rototerminal IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Crossbreeding Systems Rotaterminal crossbreeding systems A good compromise between specific and rotational systems More heterosis realized than with rotational alone Still can save replacement breeding stock Still must buy terminal sire Can select traits in individual breeds via the terminal sire Can focus on strengths and weaknesses of certain breeds IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heterosis percentage in rotational crosses Generation number Equilibrium Crossbreeding System 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 breed rotation 100.0 50.0 75.0 62.5 68.9 67.2 66.7 3 breed rotation 100.0 100.0 75.0 87.5 87.5 84.4 85.7 4 breed rotation 100.0 100.0 100.0 87.5 93.8 93.8 93.3 5 breed rotation 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 93.8 96.9 96.8 6 breed rotation 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 96.9 98.4 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Using Heterosis Disadvantage Superior performance observed in crossbred individuals is not transmitted upon mating Gene combinations are not transmitted to progeny Only individual genes are transmitted to progeny Additive gene action = heritability, EPDs, EBVs Gene combinations are rearranged or lost when crossbred animals are mated together Random segregation of alleles during meiosis IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Swine Production Goals Primary goal = Maximize Profit Genetics has a permanent effect on profit through influence or economically important production traits. Start with the best genetic merit nucleus animals Improve their merit Use the most efficient Genetic System Provide an adequate environment for the animals to express their genetic merit IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Development of a Breeding Program Identify production and carcass traits that influence profitability Assess relative economic value of traits Evaluate economic goals and production restrictions Evaluate Use packer buying program used records to evaluate current situation IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Selection Indexes Indexes are used for multiple trait selection Indexes combine the traits that economically influence a selection decision MLI = Maternal Line Index used for selection of sows and maternal line males TSI = Terminal Sire Index IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Terminal Sire Index (TSI) Days to 250 Pounds (114 kg) Backfat Loin Muscle Area Pounds of Lean in 185 pound (84 kg) carcass IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Terminal Traits Terminal traits have greatest economic impact when the commercial offspring are marketed Traits related to Growth Average daily gain (ADG) Average daily lean growth (ADLG) Days to market (Days) Days to some constant weight (Days to 250 lbs or 113 kg) IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Terminal Traits Terminal traits have greatest economic impact when the commercial offspring are marketed Traits related to Carcass Composition Backfat (BF) Loin muscle area or loin muscle depth (LMA or LD) Carcass lean % Fat free lean (FFL) IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Terminal Traits Terminal traits have greatest economic impact when the commercial offspring are marketed Traits related to Efficiency Feed intake (ADFI) Feed efficiency (F:G or G:F) Lean efficiency (F:LG or LG:F) Role that gain plays with feed efficiency IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Terminal Traits Terminal traits have greatest economic impact when the commercial offspring are marketed Traits related to Carcass Quality pH Drip loss Color Minolta – Objective color scoring Scoring – Subjective color scoring Marbling or IMF IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Terminal Traits Terminal traits have greatest economic impact when the commercial offspring are marketed Traits related to Eating quality Instron tenderness Cooking loss Consumer acceptance Sensory meat panel scores Juiciness Tenderness Flavor Off-flavor IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heritability Estimates Trait Heritability Estimate Number born .10 21-d litter weight .15 Number weaned .05 Average feed intake .24 Average daily gain .30 Days to 250 lbs. .35 Feed efficiency .30 Backfat .40 Loin muscle area .45 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Relative Economic Value of Swine Traits IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science NBS Breed Differences for ADG 1.85 a 1.8 1.75 c ab bc bc cd cd 1.7 d 1.65 1.6 B CW D IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science H L PC S Y NBS Breed Differences for BF10 1.4 1.2 de e 1 cd b a D H c b b 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 B CW IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science L PC S Y NBS Breed Differences for LMA 6.5 a 6 5.5 bc bc e b de e cd 5 4.5 4 B CW D IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science H L PC S Y NBS Breed Differences for pH 5.9 5.8 a a 5.7 b 5.6 5.5 d b c c PC S Y e 5.4 5.3 IOWA STATE B UNIVERSITY CW D Department of Animal Science H L NBS Breed Differences for Hunter L d 53 52 51 b 50 49 48 b a bc c S Y b a 47 46 45 B CW D IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science H L PC NBS Breed Differences for IMF a 4 3.5 3 b bc c 2.5 d d H L c d 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 B CW D IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science PC S Y NBS Breed Differences for Instron 6.5 d 6.25 cd 6 5.75 b b b b CW D H L c 5.5 5.25 a 5 B IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science PC S Y Sex Differences in NBS Progeny Test Trait Barrow Gilt Interaction ADG 1.81 1.67 Yes BF10 1.20 0.98 Yes LMA 5.34 6.00 Yes pH 5.66 5.64 No Hunter L 50.4 49.3 No IMF 3.16 2.55 Yes 5.94 No INST 5.63 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Growth and Carcass Traits in the NGEP Sire Line Berkshire Danbred HD Duroc Hampshire NGT LW NE SPF Dur. Newsham Spotted Yorkshire ADG (lb/d) LGOT BF10 (in.) 1.85c .63c 1.25d 1.83c .72a 0.98a 1.95a .70ab 1.13c 1.87bc .71a 1.01a 1.87bc .65c 1.17cd 1.97a .73a 1.11bc 1.90ab .73a 0.98a 1.84c .63c 1.24d 1.84c .68b 1.05ab IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science LMA 5.74c 6.75a 6.14b 6.58a 5.62c 6.35ab 6.45a 5.83c 6.17b Meat Quality Traits in the NGEP Sire Line Berkshire Danbred HD Duroc Hampshire NGT LW NE SPF Dur. Newsham Spotted Yorkshire Min. 21.8a 22.6b 22.3ab 23.3c 21.4a 22.6b 22.2ab 22.9bc 22.1a pH Drip (%) 5.91a 2.43a 5.75cd 3.34cd 5.85ab 2.75ab 5.70d 3.56d 5.84ab 2.92bc 5.88ab 2.81ab 5.82bc 2.99bc 5.83bc 2.88b 5.84ab 2.85b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science IMF(%) 2.43bc 2.61b 3.19a 2.61b 2.25c 3.30a 2.27c 2.65b 2.42c Eating Quality Traits in the NGEP Sire Line Berkshire Danbred HD Duroc Hampshire NGT LW NE SPF Dur. Newsham Spotted Yorkshire C. L. (%) 22.5a 24.3b 23.1ab 26.0d 22.9ab 22.5a 24.2bc 23.4ab 23.5bc Instr. (kg) Tend. (1-5) Moist.(%) 5.33a 3.50a 66.0a 5.85c 3.45ab 65.3ab 5.64b 3.38ab 65.0b 5.82c 3.36ab 65.0b 5.75bc 3.16c 65.5ab 5.52ab 3.36ab 65.3ab 5.87c 3.25bc 65.1b 5.68b 3.16c 65.5ab 5.87c 3.26bc 65.3ab IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science NGEP Terminal Line Results -- Ranked on % Lean Danbred HD Newsham Hampshire Yorkshire NE SPF Dur. Duroc NGT LW Spotted Berkshire %Lean 52.0 51.3 51.2 49.9 49.8 49.0 47.7 47.4 47.0 Min 23.0 22.7 25.3 23.0 23.1 23.2 23.4 23.3 22.6 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science pH 5.75 5.82 5.70 5.84 5.88 5.85 5.84 5.83 5.91 IMF 2.33 2.25 2.57 2.33 2.71 3.03 2.15 2.35 2.41 Inst. 5.81 6.12 5.86 6.13 5.78 5.65 6.09 5.92 5.74 Heritabilities and Genetic Correlations on the NGEP BF10 LMA MIN pH IMF C.L. INST BF10 .46 LMA -.61 .48 Minolta .08 .02 .25 Ult. PH .03 -.11 -.49 .38 IMF .30 -.25 .11 0.0 .47 Cook. Loss .01 .01 .26 -.45 -.02 .08 Instron -.17 .15 .18 -.42 -.17 .58 .20 Heritabilities on diagonal and genetic correlations below diagonal IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heritabilities and Genetic Correlations for Selected Traits in the NGEP ADFI ADFI DAYS BF10 LMA .50 pH DAYS BF10 -.50 .13 .57 -.05 .46 LMA PH -.13 -.05 .05 .10 -.61 .03 .48 -.11 .38 IMF MIN WHC .01 .06 .06 -.09 -.11 -.06 .30 .08 -.05 -.25 .02 .13 .00 -.49 -.92 IMF .47 .11 -.02 MIN WHC .25 .52 .19 Heritabilities on diagonal and genetic correlations below diagonal IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heritabilities and Genetic Correlations for Production Traits Estimated from NGEP Data ADG ADFI SEW D250 ADG LNGN Ave. Daily Feed Intake .50 Ave. Daily Gain-SEW .19 .43 -.50 -.60 .57 Ave. Daily Gain .58 .31 -.90 .50 Lean Gain Per Day .29 .33 -.62 .61 .48 Soundness .10 .18 -.14 .09 .07 Days/250 Heritabilities on diagonal and genetic correlations below diagonal. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science SOUN. .19 “Quality” Indicators Color Marbling Firmness Water holding capacity pH Tenderness Taste IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Measurement of Color Minolta Chromameter Minolta (range of 17-33) Hunter L (range of 40-60) New NPPC Color Standards (1-6) 1 2 4 5 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science 3 6 Color Scores 1 2 4 5 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science 3 6 Water Holding Capacity Kauffman Measures Low amount of moisture on the cut loin surface numbers indicate less moisture loss Visual Drip filter paper method Firmness/Wetness Scores (Very Firm, Firm, Soft) loss -- measures purge IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Ultimate pH Measured 24 hours after slaughter Insert pH probe into the muscle Higher pH = darker color, low drip loss, more firmness, increased tenderness Predictor 45 of water holding capacity minute pH is indication of PSE IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Intramuscular Fat (IMF) Marbling or lipid content Laboratory analysis Minimum amount is necessary for desirable eating quality (2.0 - 2.5%) New NPPC Marbling Standards (1-10) Standards correspond to intramuscular lipid content IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Marbling Scores 1 2 5 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science 3 6 4 10 Tenderness Instron tenderness using star probe Measures Less pressure to compress cooked sample pressure = more tender IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Sensory Panel Scores Trained sensory panel Evaluation of palatability Tenderness Juiciness Chewiness Flavor IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Objectives of the Study: An evaluation of pH and hydrogen ion concentration (H+) was conducted to determine if the mathematical conversion of H+ to pH could affect 1. prediction of genetic merit of animals when pH or H+ is used as an indicator in the assessment of pork quality. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Introduction Use of pH is becoming widely accepted as an indicator of pork quality. Meat scientists and geneticists are focusing on pork quality traits and their indicators in an attempt to improve the quality of commercially produced pork. Pork harvesting and processing industries are concerned with identifying environmental factors that can improve pork quality and its indicator traits so that more of their products can be sold as premiums products at the market place. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Definition of pH pH = - log base 10 * Hydrogen Ion Concentration (Zubay, 1988). This transformation was made not to normalize the distribution, but to reduce the size of the decimal evaluated. The transformation can present a potential problem. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Table 1. An example of two sires with three progeny and averages, but differing hydrogen ion concentration.1 each having identical pH Progeny phenotypic pH values Average pH Value Mean Hydrogen Ion Concentration -log 10 (mean H+), (pH Sire A 5.6, 6.2, 6.2 6.00 1.2579E-06 5.90 Sire B 5.7, 6.0, 6.3 6.00 1.1655E-06 5.93 units) 1Mean hydrogen ion concentration values have been converted to pH values (taking the negative log base 10 of the original value) in order to compare them on the same scale. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Procedures Data from the National Barrow Show™ Purebred Progeny Test was utilized Complete three-generation pedigrees, fixed and random classifications used for analyses, and pertinent muscle quality data were obtained from the National Pork Board (Des Moines, IA) Existing carcass longissimus pH data was converted to its original hydrogen ion concentration » H+ = 10-pH IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science (George A. Hormel Company, Austin, MN) Procedures cont’ Hydrogen ion concentration and pH genetic predictions and heritabilities were estimated using the ASREML software (Gilmour et al., 2001) A sire model with the full relationship matrix was incorporated IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Heritability estimates (± SE), genetic gain estimations, and breeding value correlations of pork carcass longissimus pH and hydrogen ion concentrations from the National Barrow Show™ Progeny Test. Overall mean1 Correlation of BLUP breeding values2 -0.92 (-0.85) H2 ± SE Trait pH 0.52 ± 0.074 5.681 (20.84 * 10-7) Hydrogen ion concentration 0.62 ± 0.078 23.36 * 10-7 (5.631) 1pH and Hydrogen ion concentration means have been converted to their corresponding values and are presented in parenthesis. 2Values are Pearson correlation coefficient and (Spearman rank correlation coefficient). IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Residual distribution of pork carcass longissimus pH and hydrogen measures from the National Barrow Show ™Progeny Test Hydrogen Ion Concentration Residual Distribution 1400 pH Residual Distribution Number of Observations Number of Observations 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 99.98 - 104.97 89.98 - 94.97 77.98 - 84.97 69.98 - 74.97 59.98 - 64.97 49.98 - 54.97 39.98 - 44.97 29.98 - 34.97 19.98 - 24.97 9.93 - 14.92 Department of Animal Science <=4.92 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY 7.00-7.09 6.80-6.89 6.60-6.69 6.40-6.49 6.20-6.29 6.00-6.09 5.80-5.89 5.6-5.69 5.40-5.49 5.20-5.29 <=5.09 0 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Discussion of results Both heritability estimates would be considered relatively high Greater genetic progress would be expected if selection were based on H+ concentration rather than pH The Pearson correlation ( -0.92) between the pH and H+ concentration breeding values was expected IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Discussion of results cont’ Spearman rank correlation between the breeding values for pH and H+ concentration was -0.85 While relatively strong, the rank correlation does indicate that some difference in ranking of sires is likely to occur depending whether they are ranked based on pH or H+ concentration breeding values IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Example truncation selection for pH and Hydrogen ion concentration based on top 5 percent breeding values. IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Example truncation selection for pH and Hydrogen ion concentration based on top 1, 5, and 25% percent breeding values. H+ Selection differential Selection Intensity Select on pH Select on H+ Selection Differential Selection differential loss, % 25% -0.78 -0.82 -0.04 4.8 5% -1.80 -1.93 -0.13 6.7 1% -2.53 -2.91 -0.38 13.1 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science