4.5 Article

Indirect effect of IGF2 intron3 g.3072G>A mutation on prolificacy in sows

Journal

ANIMAL GENETICS
Volume 41, Issue 5, Pages 493-498

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2010.02040.x

Keywords

backfat; IGF2 expression; reproduction; sows

Funding

  1. Institute for the Promotion of Innovation through Science and Technology (IWT), Brussels
  2. Alberta Livestock and Industry Development Fund (ALIDF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>A QTL located in the paternally expressed insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF2) gene is known to increase muscle growth and reduce fat deposition in pigs. This makes the QTL in IGF2 a good marker for use in pig breeding programmes. However, care has to be taken as it is postulated that increased leanness and lowered fat deposition may have a negative effect on the prolificacy and longevity of sows. Selection of sire and dam lines for different alleles of the mutation in the paternally imprinted IGF2 gene could actually provide a solution to this problem. Therefore, in this study, the effect of the IGF2 QTL on prolificacy-related traits in sows was investigated. It was found that the paternal IGF2 wild-type allele was associated with higher reproduction performance in the sow. Moreover, it was also examined whether the difference in prolificacy in sows could be a consequence of differential IGF2 expression in the ovarian follicles of the sow or whether it is mainly a secondary effect caused by differences in fatness traits. Therefore, IGF2 expression was measured in follicles of different sizes from sows with different genotypes for the paternal IGF2 allele. It was observed that, however, while the size of the follicles was associated with follicular IGF2 expression level, the IGF2 genotype was not. It could be concluded that the difference in prolificacy of sows with a different paternal IGF2 genotype could be a secondary effect, resulting from differences in fat deposition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available