Journals / Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences / 2021 / Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 3

Power of body live weights in differentiation physiological growth of goat breeds

Pages
492–500
Publication Date
2022-11-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results showed that only LBW of the week 1, 2, 5, 9, and 11, and week 1, 2, 3, 11, and 12 were efficient in discriminating male and female kids, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:We assumed that live body weight (LBW) would be useful to be utilized as informative categorical variable in differentiation goat performance towards better assignment into breeds.
📊
Key Findings & Data:One-day old goat kids of both sexes were separately allocated as 3 breeds: Baladi, crossbreds and Shami.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results showed that only LBW of the week 1, 2, 5, 9, and 11, and week 1, 2, 3, 11, and 12 were efficient in discriminating male and female kids, respectively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

We assumed that live body weight (LBW) would be useful to be utilized as informative categorical variable in differentiation goat performance towards better assignment into breeds. One-day old goat kids of both sexes were separately allocated as 3 breeds: Baladi, crossbreds and Shami. The kid LBW was recorded weekly until the 12th week of age. Weekly LBW showed a significant increase (p < 0.05) for both males and females of the 3 breeds and highly significant (p < 0.0001) between breeds. The high phenotypic correlation between most of the studied measurements encouraged us to investigate their efficiency in breed differentiation at early life age. Results showed that only LBW of the week 1, 2, 5, 9, and 11, and week 1, 2, 3, 11, and 12 were efficient in discriminating male and female kids, respectively. These results were better presented by showing significant genetic distances (p < 0.0001) between the breeds using the Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic mean (UPGMA) dendrogram. It is inferred that the phylogenetic tree lengths of the three breeds were 29.02 and 222.13 for male and female kids, respectively. Baladi and crossbred kids of both sexes grouped into one cluster closer than Shami kids. The canonical discriminant analysis was proved its successfulness for identifying breed based on LBW measurement.

🔖

Cite This Article

AL-ATIYAT, R., AL-DAWOOD, A. (2022). Power of body live weights in differentiation physiological growth of goat breeds. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 3, 492–500. https://ajindex.com/articles/614588

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Miller BA, Christopher D Lu. Current status of global dairy goat production: an overview. Asian-Australas Journal of Animal Sciences 2019; 32: 1219-1232
  2. Pinheiro RSB, Jorge AM. Biometric measurements obtained in vivo and in the carcass of culled ewes at different physiological stages. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 2010; 39: 440-445
  3. Al-Dawood A, Al-Khamaiseh S, Al-Atiyat RM. A comparative study on the growth rate and survivability of three goat breeds from Jordan. Journal of Applied Animal Research 2020; 48: 331-339
  4. Johansson AM, Upadhyay M, Strandberg E, Eriksson S. Genetic differentiation between subpopulations of Swedish mountain (Fjäll and Fjällnära) cattle. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Animal Science 2020; 69: 39-46
  5. Handiwirawan E, Noor R, Sumantri C, Subandriyo S. The differentiation of sheep breed based on the body measurements. Journal of the Indonesian Tropical Animal Agriculture 2011; 36: 1-8
  6. Haldar A, Pal P, Datta M, Paul R, Pal SK et al. Prolificacy and its relationship with age, body weight, parity, previous litter size and body linear type traits in meat-type goats. Asian-Australas Journal of Animal Sciences 2014; 27: 628-634
  7. Silva LF, Pires CC. Quantitative evaluation and prediction of the bone, muscle and fat proportion of the ovine carcass. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 2000; 29: 1253-1260
  8. Tabbaa M, Al-Atiyat R. Breeding objectives, selection criteria and factors influencing them for goat breeding in Jordan. Small Ruminant Research 2009; 84: 8-15
  9. Al-Khamaiseh SK, Al-Sawalqa AG, Al-Atiyat RM. The effects of doe weight, litter size and sex on kids’ birth weight of three goat breeds under sedentary production system. Livestock Research for Rural Development 2020; 32
  10. SAS. 9.3. Foundation for Microsoft Windows, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 2012
  11. Sneath PHA, Sokal RR. Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco, USA: Freeman, 1973
  12. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. MEGA6: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology & Evolution 2013; 30: 2725-2729
  13. Al-Atiyat R. Sustainable breeding program of Black Bedouin goat for conserving genetic diversity: Simulated scenarios for in situ conservation. Jordan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2014; 10: 83-95
  14. Abd-Allah S, Abd-El Rahman HH, Shoukry MM, Mohamed MI, Salman FM et al. Some body measurements as a management tool for Shami goats raised in subtropical areas in Egypt. Bulletin of the Nationa