Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T03:28:37.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cumulative selection differentials and realized heritabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. Thompson  and
J. Juga
R. Thompson
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Edinburgh Research Centre, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
J. Juga
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Research, Edinburgh Research Centre, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Abstract

Two alternative ways of estimating cumulative selection differentials are compared. An alternative method is developed that includes the advantages of both methods. This alternative method is shown to give rise to less biased estimates of realized heritability

Information

Type
Papers
Information
Animal Production , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , October 1989 , pp. 203 - 208
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Blair, H. T. and Pollak, E. J. 1984. Estimation of genetic trend in a selected population with and without the use of a control population. Journal of Animal Science 58: 878–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulmer, M. G. 1971. The effect of selection on genetic variability. American Naturalist 105: 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, N. D. and Thompson, R. 1986. Design of multivariate selection experiments to estimate genetic parameters. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 72: 466–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henderson, C. R. 1973. Sire evaluation and genetic trends. Proceedings of the Animal Breeding and Genetics Symposium, Blacksburg, Virginia, pp. 10–41. American Society of Animal Science, Champaign, Illinois.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1970. Design of experiments to estimate heritability by regression of offspring on selected parents. Biometrics 26: 566–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. 1972. Estimation of realised heritabilities from selection experiments. 1. Divergent selection. Biometrics 28: 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, J. W. 1986. Cumulative selection differentials and realized heritabilities with overlapping generations. Animal Production 42: 411–415.Google Scholar
Newman, J. A., Rahnefeld, G. W. and Fredeen, H. T. 1973. Selection intensity and response to selection for yearling weight in beef cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 53: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pattie, W. A. 1965. Selection for weaning weight in Merino sheep. 1. Direct response to selection. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 5: 353–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, D. A. and Kennedy, B. W. 1984. Estimation of response to selection using least-squares and mixed model methodology. Journal of Animal Science 58: 1097–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tallis, G. M. 1987. Ancestral covariance and the Bulmer effect. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 73: 815–820.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, R. 1977. Estimation of quantitative genetic parameters. Proceedings of the International Conference on Quantitative Genetics, Iowa, 1976, pp. 639–657. Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. 1979. Sire evaluation. Biometrics 35: 339–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. 1986. Estimation of realized heritability in a selected population using mixed model methods. Génétique Sélection Évolution 18: 475–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar