Ewe and lamb effects on lamb birth weight and growth rate in weaning weight selection lines.

Abstract

Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. Vol. I6 EWE AND LAMB EFFECTS ON LAMB BIRTH WEIGHT AND GROWTH RATE IN WEANING WEIGHT SELECTION LINES G.N. HINCH, C.J. THWAITES and T.N. EDEY SUMMARY Lambs from divergent weaning weight selection lines, born and reared by their own dams, carried and reared by unselected embryo recipient dams or reared artificially, were used to assess ewe and lamb effects on birth weights and preweaning growth rates. Both birth weight and growth rate appear to be influenced to a large extent by direct lamb effects with the maternal contribution being relatively less important. (Keywords: effects). weight selection, lambs, birth weight, preweaning growth, rearing INTRODUCTION Selection for increased weight and consequently mature size is a common practice in animal species throughout the world. However little is known about the influence of such selection on the relative contributions of direct and maternal effects on birth weight and preweaning growth. This paper examines the effects on birth weight and preweaning growth rate of lambs of vastly different mature size; of rearing lambs on their own dams or on foster mothers of another genotype or by artificial rearing. METHODS A mixed lines (Pattie selected over weight and a age flock of Merino ewes from divergent weaning weight selection 1965) was used in this study. The ewes were from three lines, 12 generations for high (Weight plus) and low (Weight minus) weaning random-bred control (C) line. plus (W+> and program. unrelated from a mature Weight plus In February 1984 sub-groups of 30 ewes from each of the Weight Weight minus (W-) lines were used as donor ewes in an embryo transfer One or two embryos of similar genotype (W-t or W-) were transferred to Merino recipient dams (R). The recipient ewes were chosen at random age (3-6 years) flock in which the ewes were of similar weight to the selection line ewes (Table 1). One oestrous cycle after embryo transfer, selection line ewes (W+, W-, C) were joined to sires of their own genotype for three cycles after sponge withdrawal. Joining date was recorded for all ewes. All ewes from both recipient and selection flocks were run on improved pastures with sorghum grain supplement (300 g/d) during the last six weeks of pregnancy, At lambing, lambs were weighed, date of birth recorded and gestation length determined. A sub-group of lambs from each of the selection lines (W+, W-, C > was taken from their dams and reared artificially to 6 weeks of age. Lambs from the recipient flock and the balance of the selection flocks were reared by their dams until weaning at 10 weeks of age. All ewes grazed ad libitum on phalaris/white clover pastures during the,post partum period. Department of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, 2351, N.S.W. Australia 231 Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. Vol. I6 Lambs were weighed at approximately fortnightly intervals from birth to weaning and milk intakes of artificially reared lambs were recorded. Milk production of ewes was assessed by weekly machine milking as described by Heath et al. 1984. Analyses Lamb birth weights and growth rates to 40 or 70 days were analysed using a least squares model incorporating lamb genotype, litter size, lamb sex, rearing category and ewe weight or birth weight as covariates for birth weight and growth rate analyses respectively. Date of birth was not included in the overall model as it was confounded with rearing group. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The mean ewe shown in Table 1, lactation. Least of lambs to 40 and joining weights along with total square means for 70 days are also and number of ewes included in this study are milk production levels assessed at 40 days of gestation length, birth weight and growth rates shown in Table 1. Birth weight There were significant differences between lamb genotypes in birth weights, Weight plus lambs being heavier than Weight minus and Control lambs (P<O.OOl). Within ewe genotypes the Weight minus lambs born to recipient dams (R, W-) were not significantly heavier (6.5%, PcO.10) than those born by their own genotype ewes (R, W+). Lambs in recipient ewes (R, W+) were not significantly heavier (4.6%) than lambs born to their own genotype dams (W+, W+). There were significant differences between singles (3.83 kg) and twins (3.42 kg) in birth weight (P<O.OOl), while the difference between males (3.85 kg) and 232 Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. Vol. 16 females (3.63 kg) was not significant (P<O.lO). birth weight, although significant (P<O.OOl) did effects, the complete model explaining only 39.2 this 18.2% was explained by lamb genotype, 5.8% sex and litter size. The influence of ewe weight on not alter the pattern of other % of variation in birth weight; of by maternal effects and 9.5% by Since the early embryo transfer studies of Hunter (1956) and Dickinson et al. (1962) little has been done to examine the relative contribution of maternal and lamb genotypes to birth weight. In the between-breed comparisons conducted by these authors they concluded that the relative contribution was much weighted to the lamb. In this present study, where lambs of similar breed but different mature size were used, a similar conclusion arises, birth weight being largely determined by lamb breed rather than maternal environment. The mechanisms which may contribute to this are unclear but appear not to be attributable to changes in gestation length (Table 1) as reported for inter-breed studies (Anderson et al. 1981). Growth rates Lamb genotype differences in growth rate were evident at both 40 and 70 days Lambs of the Weight plus genotype grew faster than Control of age (P<O.OOl). lambs which in turn grew faster than Weight minus lambs. There was a significant effect of rearing category (P<O.OOl) at both 40 and 70 days. To 40 days lambs reared by recipient dams tended to have greater growth rates than lambs reared by their own dams (P<O.lO) which in turn grew faster than artificially or twin reared lambs (PcO.05). At 70 days the difference between growth rates of recipient and own genotype-reared lambs was significant (30.8, 34.5% respectively) for both Weight plus and Weight minus lambs (P<O.Ol). The growth rates of own genotype reared lambs declined markedly between 40 and 70 days (23.7% singles, 17.1% twins) while for recipient reared lambs changes in growth rate were small (5-g%). The effect of birth weight on growth 40 and 70 days. However the effect did not except to render the effects of litter size The complete model explained some 45.2% of 75.9% to 70 days. rate was significant (P<O.OOl) at both alter the pattern for other factors and sex at 70 days not significant. variation in growth rate to 40 days and If artificial rearing was excluded from the model the majority of variation in growth rate to 40 days was attributable to lamb effects (29.3%) with rearing effects explaining only 10% of variation. With artificial rearing included in the model, 23.9% of variation is attributable to lamb effects and 13.5% to rearing. At 70 days 34.4% of growth rate variation is attributable to lamb genotype and 35.4% to rearing. In his review of maternal effects on growth in sheep, Bradford (1972) concluded that about half of the response to selection for weaning weight is associated with improved milk production, a conclusion also reached by Barlow (1978) in his review on cattle. However to a large extent the conclusion of Bradford (1972) was based on a study of Yates and Pattie (1970) on crossbred lambs born to ewes from weaning weight selection lines. Our data from the same selection lines after a further seven generations of selection, suggest that somewhat more than 50% of the difference between lines may be attributable to direct effects of the lamb. This is shown by the fact that the relative and absolute differences between lines change little with different rearing systems. This effect is evident over a wide range in growth rates to 40 days, the optimal time for determination of maternal effects (Gjedrem 1967). 233 Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. Vol. 16 At 70 days rearing effects appear to be equal to direct lamb effects. However this may have been due in part to the confounding of rearing and seasonal effects, the earlier born recipient reared lambs having access to better quality pasture over the later part of the growth period (40-70 days) than the own genotype-reared lambs. This is supported by the greater-drop (13%) in growth rates which occurred for the own genotype-reared lambs compared with the recipient reared animals. The wide range in growth rates observed make partitioning of maternal effects difficult as the original design assumed that artificial rearing on ad Zibitim milk would have resulted in optimal 'maternal' conditions for the expression of lamb growth. The lower growth rates attained by artificial rearing may have been associated with behavioural problems but also it seems likely that low concentrations of dry matter may have contributed to this as very high fluid intakes were recorded (Table 1) with low efficiency of gain. Whatever the cause of these depressed growth rates, the relative growth rates of the genotypes remain consistent and the data suggest that direct genetic makeup of the lamb contributes somewhat more than 50% of the differences between selection lines as originally suggested by Yates and Pattie (1970). CONCLUSION The relative contribution of ewe and lamb effects to birth weight and preweaning growth rate differences between divergent weaning weight selection lines have been examined. Direct lamb effects are the predominating influence on birth weight while for preweaning growth rate direct lamb effects appear to explain somewhat more than 50% of the differences between lines. Further studies of these lines, including partial or complete diallel crosses, should allow the more accurate quantification of maternal effects on these two 'growth' traits. REFERENCES ANDERSON, G-B., BRADFORD, G-E. and CUPPS, P.T. (1981). - 16: 115. Theriog. BARLOW, R. (1978) Anim. Breed. Abst. 46: 469. BRADFORD, G.E. (1972). J. Anim. Sci. 35: 1324. DICKINSON, A.G., HANCOCK, J-L., HOVELL,G.R., TAYLOR, StC.S. and WIENER, G. (1962). Anim, Prod. 4: 64. GJEDREM, T. (1967). Acta rgr. Scan. 17: 199. HEATH, N-E., HINCH, G.N. and THWAITES,?.J. (1984). In 'Reproduction in Sheep', (Australian Academy of P- 234, editors D.R. Lindsay and D-T, Pearce. Science: Canberra). HUNTER, G.L. (1956). J. Agric. Sci. Camb. 48: 36. PATTIE, W.A. (1965). Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Hush. 5: 353. YATES, W-5. and PATTIE, W.A. (1970). Proc. Aust. Soc.=Anim, Prod. 8: 154. = 234