Genetic parameters and purebred–crossbred genetic correlations for growth, meat quality, and carcass traits in pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth, meat quality, and carcass traits are of economic importance in swine breeding. Understanding their genetic basis in purebred (PB) and commercial crossbred (CB) pigs is necessary for a successful breeding program because, although the breeding goal is to improve CB performance, phenotype collection and selection are usually carried out in PB populations housed in biosecure nucleus herds. Thus, the selection is indirect, and the accuracy of selection depends on the genetic correlation between PB and CB performance (rpc). The objectives of this study were to 1) estimate genetic parameters for growth, meat quality, and carcass traits in a PB sire line and related commercial CB pigs and 2) estimate the corresponding genetic correlations between purebred and crossbred performance (rpc). Both objectives were investigated by using pedigree information only (PBLUP) and by combining pedigree and genomic information in a single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) procedure. Growth rate showed moderate estimates of heritability for both PB and CB based on PBLUP, while estimates were higher in CB based on ssGBLUP. Heritability estimates for meat quality traits were diverse and slightly different based on PB and CB data with both methods. Carcass traits had higher heritability estimates based on PB compared with CB data based on PBLUP and slightly higher estimates for CB data based on ssGBLUP. A wide range of estimates of genetic correlations were obtained among traits within the PB and CB data. In the PB population, estimates of heritabilities and genetic correlations were similar based on PBLUP and ssGBLUP for all traits, while based on the CB data, ssGBLUP resulted in different estimates of genetic parameters with lower SEs. With some exceptions, estimates of rpc were moderate to high. The SE on the rpc estimates was generally large when based on PBLUP due to limited sample size, especially for CBs. In contrast, estimates of rpc based on ssGBLUP were not only more precise but also more consistent among pairs of traits, considering their genetic correlations within the PB and CB data. The wide range of estimates of rpc (less than 0.70 for 7 out of 13 traits) indicates that the use of CB phenotypes recorded on commercial farms, along with genomic information, for selection in the PB population has potential to increase the genetic progress of CB performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".