4.7 Article

Response to selection for bacterial cold water disease resistance in rainbow trout

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
卷 88, 期 6, 页码 1936-1946

出版社

AMER SOC ANIMAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.2527/jas.2009-2538

关键词

disease resistance; Flavobacterium psychrophilum; heritability; rainbow trout; selection; survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A family-based selection program was initiated at the National Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture in 2005 to improve resistance to bacterial cold water disease (BCWD) in rainbow trout. The objective of this study was to estimate response to 2 generations of selection. A total of 14,841 juvenile fish (BW = 3.1 g; SD = 1.1 g) from 230 full-sib families and 3 randomly mated control lines were challenged intraperitoneally with Flavobacterium psychrophilum, the bacterium that causes BCWD, and mortalities were observed for 21 d. Selection was applied to family EBV derived from a proportional-hazards frailty (animal) model while constraining rate of inbreeding to <= 1% per generation. After adjusting for nongenetic effects, survival rate of select-line families increased by 24.6 +/- 6.8 and 44.7 +/- 6.7 (cumulative) percentage points after 1 and 2 generations of selection, respectively (P < 0.01). Genetic trend, estimated from a linear animal model that fit genetic group effects, was 19.0 +/- 4.1 percentage points per generation and approached significance (P = 0.07). Heritability estimates from the proportional-hazards frailty model and linear animal model were similar (0.22 and 0.23, respectively), and family EBV from both models were highly correlated (-0.92). Accuracy of selection, estimated as the correlation between mid-parent EBV and progeny survival rate, was 0.20 (P < 0.01) for the proportional-hazards frailty model and 0.18 (P = 0.01) for the linear animal model. Accuracy estimates were not different (P = 0.81) between the models. This study demonstrates that selective breeding can be effective for improving resistance to experimental BCWD challenge in rainbow trout.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据