Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T00:18:30.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performance and utilization of Northern European short-tailed breeds of sheep and their crosses in North America: a review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2010

D. L. Thomas
D. L. Thomas*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, 1675 Observatory Drive, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA
*
†E-mail: dlthomas@wisc.edu
Get access

Abstract

The five Northern European short-tailed sheep breeds present in North America are the Finnsheep, Romanov, Icelandic, Shetland and Gotland. The Finnsheep and Romanov were first imported in 1966 and 1986, respectively, for their high reproductive performance. The Shetland, Icelandic and Gotland breeds were first imported in 1980, 1985 and 2005, respectively, for the uniqueness of their physical appearance and their unique fleeces desired by fiber craftspeople. There have been no scientific studies conducted on the performance of the Shetland, Icelandic or Gotland breeds relative to other breeds of sheep in North America. However, the Shetland and Icelandic breeds have become very popular in the United States and ranked 9th and 18th, respectively, among 35 breeds of sheep for number of purebred animals registered in 2008. The performance of the Finnsheep breed in North America relative to domestic breeds has been thoroughly investigated. Compared to several domestic purebreds and crosses, sheep with Finnsheep breeding had a younger age at puberty, greater fertility to autumn mating, greater litter size, greater survival to weaning, similar growth rate, similar subcutaneous fat thickness, smaller loin muscle area and greater percentage of kidney and pelvic fat. Each 1% increase in Finnsheep breeding in ewes was associated with approximately 0.01 more lambs born per ewe lambing. In North American studies, Romanov ewes were superior to Finnsheep ewes for reproductive rate and lamb production per ewe under both autumn and spring mating. Lambs of the two breeds were similar for survival, growth and carcass traits. Romanov and Romanov-cross ewes produced fleeces that were heavily contaminated with medulated and colored fibers and were of very low commercial value. Three composite breeds containing 25% to 49% Finnsheep breeding (Polypay, Rideau Arcott and Outaouais Arcott) were developed in North America and are now more popular than the Finnsheep breed.

Keywords

FinnsheepRomanovIcelandicShetlandsheep breeds
Type
EAAP Annual Meeting 2008: Session Use and Importance of short tailed sheep breeds
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 8 , August 2010 , pp. 1283 - 1296
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2010

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.)

References

APSA (American Polypay Sheep Association) 2009. The polypay history. Retrieved May 29, 2009, from http://www.countrylovin.com/polypay/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Baker, RL 1988. Finnsheep and their utilization – experiences in temperate conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science in Finland 60, 455–472.Google Scholar
Berger, YM, Lupton, CJ 1994. Wool characteristics of Romanov × Targhee crossbred ewes in comparison to Finn × Targhee crossbred ewes. Sheep and Goat Research Journal 10 2, 120–123.Google Scholar
Boylan, WJ, Sakul, H 1988. Milk production in Finnsheep and Romanov breeds. Journal of Agricultural Science in Finland 60, 603–607.Google Scholar
Boylan, WJ, Berger, YM, Allen, CE 1976. Carcass merit of Finnsheep crossbred lambs. Journal of Animal Science 42, 1413–1420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, S 2008. Stefania “queen of Icelandic sheep”. The Shepherd Magazine 53, 27–31.Google Scholar
Bunge, R, Thomas, DL, Nash, TG 1993b. Performance of hair breeds and prolific wool breeds of sheep in southern Illinois: lamb production of F1 ewe lambs. Journal of Animal Science 71, 2012–2017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bunge, R, Thomas, DL, Nash, TG 1995. Performance of hair breeds and prolific wool breeds of sheep in southern Illinois: lamb production of F1 adult ewes. Journal of Animal Science 73, 1602–1608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bunge, R, Thomas, DL, Nash, TG, Fernando, RL 1993a. Performance of hair breeds and prolific wool breeds of sheep in southern Illinois: effect of breed of service sire on lamb production of Suffolk and Targhee ewes. Journal of Animal Science 71, 321–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bunge, R, Thomas, DL, Nash, TG, Lupton, CJ 1996. Performance of hair breeds and prolific wool breeds of sheep in southern Illinois: wool production and fleece quality. Journal of Animal Science 74, 25–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casas, E, Freking, BA, Leymaster, KA 2004. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel, and Montadale breeds of sheep: II. Reproduction of F1 ewes in fall mating systems. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1280–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casas, E, Freking, BA, Leymaster, KA 2005. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel, and Montadale breeds of sheep: V. Reproduction of F1 ewes in spring mating seasons. Journal of Animal Science 83, 2743–2751.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cedillo, RM, Hohenboken, W, Drummond, J 1977. Genetic and environmental effects on age at first estrus and on wool and lamb production of crossbred ewe lambs. Journal of Animal Science 44, 948–957.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, SE, Hohenboken, WD 1983. Estimation of repeatability, heritability and breed differences for lamb production. Journal of Animal Science 56, 309–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CLRC (Canadian Livestock Records Corporation) 2009. Annual report. Retrieved May 29, 2009, from http://www.clrc.ca/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Cochran, KP, Notter, DR, McClaughtery, FS 1984. A comparison of Dorset and Finnish Landrace crossbred ewes. Journal of Animal Science 59, 329–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CYCA (Craft Yarn Council of America) 2009. Retrieved June 3, 2009, from http://www.craftyarncouncil.com/Google Scholar
Dahmen, JJ, Hinman, DD, Jacobs, JA, Everson, DO 1978. Wool traits of Panama and Finn × Panama yearling and two-year-old ewes. Journal of Animal Science 47, 331–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahmen, JJ, Hinman, DD, Jacobs, JA, Everson, DO 1979. Performance and carcass characteristics of Suffolk sired lambs from Panama and Finn × Panama dams. Journal of Animal Science 49, 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deakin, GA 2009. Report of registrations by purebred sheep association. The Banner Sheep Magazine 32, 20.Google Scholar
Dickerson, GE 1969. Experimental approaches in utilizing breed resources. Animal Breeding Abstracts 37, 191–202.Google Scholar
Dickerson, GE 1977. Crossbreeding evaluation of Finnsheep and some US breeds for market lamb production. North Central Regional Publication no. 246. Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC and University of Nebraska.Google Scholar
Dickerson, GE, Laster, DB 1975. Breed, heterosis and environmental influences on growth and puberty in ewe lambs. Journal of Animal Science 41, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickerson, GE, Glimp, HA, Gregory, KE 1975. Genetic resources for efficient meat production in sheep: preweaning viability and growth of Finnsheep and domestic crossbred lambs. Journal of Animal Science 41, 43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doane, L 2008. Maple ridge sheep farm. Retrieved August 5, 2008, from http://www.mrsf.com/Google Scholar
Donald, HP, Read, J 1967. The performance of Finnish Landrace sheep in Britain. Animal Production 9, 471–476.Google Scholar
Drummond, J, O’Connell, RA, Colman, KL 1982. The effects of age and Finnsheep breeding on wool properties and processing characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 54, 8–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dýrmundsson, ÓR, Niżnikowski, R 2010. North European short-tailed breeds of sheep: a review. Animal (in press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dzakuma, J, Stritzke, DJ, Whiteman, JV 1982. Fertility and prolificacy of crossbred ewes under two cycles of accelerated lambing. Journal of Animal Science 54, 213–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ercanbrack, SK, Knight, AD 1985. Lifetime (seven years) production of 1/4 and 1/2 Finnish Landrace ewes from Rambouillet, Targhee and Columbia dams under range conditions. Journal of Animal Science 61, 66–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fahmy, MH 1985. The accumulative effect of Finnsheep breeding in crossbreeding schemes: growth and carcass traits. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 65, 811–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, MH 1987. The accumulative effect of Finnsheep breeding in crossbreeding schemes: wool production and fleece characteristics. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 67, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, MH 1989. The accumulative effect of Finnsheep breeding in crossbreeding schemes: market lamb production from crossbred ewes. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 69, 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, MH 1990. The accumulative effect of Finnsheep breeding in crossbreeding schemes: ewe productivity under an accelerated lambing system. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 70, 967–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, MH 1996a. Spread of prolific sheep: the Americas. In Prolific sheep (ed. MH Fahmy), pp. 230–232. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Fahmy, MH 1996b. Growth, fertility, prolificacy and fleece weight of Romanov, Finnsheep and Booroola purebreds and their first cross and backcross with the DLS breed. Animal Science 62, 479–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, MH, Dufour, JJ 1988. The accumulative effect of Finnsheep breeding in crossbreeding schemes: reproductive performance. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68, 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, MH, Boucher, JM, Poste, LM, Gregoire, R, Butler, G, Comeau, JE 1992. Feed efficiency, carcass characteristics, and sensory quality of lambs, with or without prolific ancestry, fed diets with different protein supplements. Journal of Animal Science 70, 1365–1374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Firefly Fields 2009. Retrieved May 27, 2009, from http://www.fireflyfields.com/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, NM, Dickerson, GE, Young, LD 1984. Lamb production and its components in pure breeds and composite lines. II. Breed effects and heterosis. Journal of Animal Science 58, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freetly, HC, Leymaster, KA 2004. Relationship between litter weight and litter size in six breeds of sheep. Journal of Animal Science 82, 612–618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freking, BA, Leymaster, KA 2004. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel, and Montadale breeds of sheep: IV. Survival, growth, and carcass traits of F1 lambs. Journal of Animal Science 82, 3144–3153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallivan, C, Kemp, RA, Berger, YM, Young, LD 1993. Comparison of Finnish Landrace and Romanov as prolific breeds in a terminal-sire crossbreeding system. Journal of Animal Science 71, 2910–2918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gama, LT, Dickerson, GE, Young, LD, Leymaster, KA 1991. Effects of breed, heterosis, age of dam, litter size, and birth weight on lamb mortality. Journal of Animal Science 69, 2727–2743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
GSBANA (Gotland Sheep Breeders Association of North America) 2008. The association. Retrieved August 5, 2008, from http://www.everranch.com/development/GSBANA/Membership.phpGoogle Scholar
Hackett, AJ, Wolynetz, MS 1985. Reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace and Suffolk sheep maintained indoors year-round. Journal of Animal Science 60, 334–341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hohenboken, W 1977. Genetic and environmental effects on postweaning growth and carcass merit of crossbred lambs. Journal of Animal Science 45, 1261–1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulet, CV, Ercanbrack, SK, Knight, AD 1984. Development of the Polypay breed of sheep. Journal of Animal Science 58, 15–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iniguez, LC, Bradford, GE, Mwai, OA 1986. Lambing date and lamb production of spring-mated Rambouillet, Dorset and Finnsheep ewes and their F1 crosses. Journal of Animal Science 63, 715–728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeffcoate, IA, Rawlings, NC, Howell, WE 1984. Duration of the breeding season and response to reproductive manipulation in five breeds of sheep under northern prairie conditions. Theriogenology 22, 279–290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jenkins, TG, Ford, JJ 1982. Estrous characteristics of Finnsheep crossbred and Morlam ewes. Journal of Animal Science 55, 741–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamberson, WR, Thomas, DL 1982. Effects of season and breed of sire on incidence of estrus and ovulation rate in sheep. Journal of Animal Science 54, 533–539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laster, DB, Glimp, HA, Dickerson, GE 1972. Factors affecting reproduction in ewe lambs. Journal of Animal Science 35, 79–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, RD, Burfening, PJ 1988. Comparison of Finnish Landrace crossbred ewes with Columbia, Rambouillet and Targhee ewes on western range. Journal of Animal Science 66, 1059–1066.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lupton, CJ, Freking, BA, Leymaster, KA 2004. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel, and Montadale breeds of sheep: III. Wool characteristics of F1 ewes. Journal of Animal Science 82, 2293–2300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magid, AF, Swanson, VB, Brinks, JS, Dickerson, GE, Smith, GM 1981a. Border Leicester and Finnsheep crosses. I. Survival, growth and carcass traits of F1 lambs. Journal of Animal Science 52, 1253–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magid, AF, Swanson, VB, Brinks, JS, Dickerson, GE, Smith, GM 1981b. Border Leicester and Finnsheep crosses. II. Productivity of F1 ewes. Journal of Animal Science 52, 1262–1271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magid, AF, Swanson, VB, Brinks, JS, Dickerson, GE, Crouse, JA, Smith, GM 1981c. Border Leicester and Finnsheep crosses. III. Market lamb production from crossbred ewes. Journal of Animal Science 52, 1272–1279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Méthot, H, Girard, CL, Matte, JJ, Castonguay, FW 2008. Effects of dietary supplements of folic acid on reproductive performance in ewes. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 88, 489–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, HH, Bradford, GE 1973. Reproduction in Targhee and Finnish Landrace × Targhee ewes. Journal of Animal Science 36, 847–853.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohammed-Yusuff, MK, Dickerson, GE, Young, LD 1992. Reproductive rate and genetic variation in composite and parental populations: experimental results in sheep. Journal of Animal Science 70, 673–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Notter, DR, Copenhaver, JS 1980a. Performance of Finnish Landrace crossbred ewes under accelerated lambing. I. Fertility, prolificacy and ewe productivity. Journal of Animal Science 51, 1033–1042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Notter, DR, Copenhaver, JS 1980b. Performance of Finnish Landrace crossbred ewes under accelerated lambing. II. Lamb growth and survival. Journal of Animal Science 51, 1043–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Notter, DR, McClaughterty, FS 1991. Effects of ewe breed and management system on efficiency of lamb production: I. Ewe productivity. Journal of Animal Science 69, 13–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Notter, DR, Ferrell, CL, Field, RA 1984. Effects of breed and intake level on growth and feed efficiency in ram lambs. Journal of Animal Science 58, 560–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Notter, DR, Kelly, RF, McClaughterty, FS 1991. Effects of ewe breed and management system on efficiency of lamb production: II. Lamb growth, survival and carcass characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 69, 22–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oltenacu, EAB, Boylan, WJ 1981a. Productivity of purebred and crossbred Finnsheep. I. Reproductive traits of ewes and lamb survival. Journal of Animal Science 52, 989–997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oltenacu, EAB, Boylan, WJ 1981b. Productivity of purebred and crossbred Finnsheep. II. Lamb weights and production indices of ewes. Journal of Animal Science 52, 998–1006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olthoff, JC, Boylan, WJ 1991a. Growth performance of lambs from purebred and crossbred Finnsheep ewes. Small Ruminant Research 4, 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olthoff, JC, Boylan, WJ 1991b. Carcass merit of market lambs from purebred and crossbred Finnsheep ewes. Small Ruminant Research 4, 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirke, JF, Stabenfeldt, GH, Bradford, GE 1985. Onset of puberty and duration of the breeding season in Suffolk, Rambouillet, Finnish Landrace, Dorset and Finn-Dorset ewe lambs. Journal of Animal Science 60, 1463–1471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramdas, S, Dally, M, Bradford, GE, Sakul, H 1993. Lamb and wool production of Targhee and prolific breed crossbred ewes. Sheep Research Journal 9, 62–70.Google Scholar
Rawlings, NC, Jeffcoate, IA, Howell, WE 1987. Response of purebred and crossbred ewes to intensified management. Journal of Animal Science 65, 651–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricordeau, G, Tchamitchian, L, Thimonier, J, Flamant, JC, Theriez, M 1978. First survey results obtained in France on reproductive and maternal performance in sheep, with particular reference to the Romanov breed and crosses with it. Livestock Production Science 5, 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryder, ML 1983. Sheep and Man, pp. 522–550. Duckworth & Co. Ltd, London.Google Scholar
Safari, E, Fogarty, NM, Gilmour, AR 2005. A review of genetic parameter estimates for wool, growth, meat and reproduction traits in sheep. Livestock Production Science 92, 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakul, H, Boylan, WJ, Shrestha, JNB 1999. Animal model evaluation of dairy traits in US sheep breeds, their crosses and three synthetic populations. Small Ruminant Research 34, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, B 2008. Icelandic sheep. Retrieved August 5, 2008, from http://www.bridoshafarm.com/icelandicsheep.aspGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Vesely, JA 1986. Evaluation of established breeds in Canada for daily gain and body weights. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66, 897–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Heaney, DP 1992. Productivity of Arcott sheep and their crosses when lambs are raised with their dams. Small Ruminant Research 8, 333–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Heaney, DP 2003. Review of Canadian, Outaouais and Rideau Arcott breeds of sheep. 1. Development and characterization. Small Ruminant Research 49, 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Heaney, DP 2004. Review of Canadian, Outaouais and Rideau Arcott breeds of sheep. 2. Crossbreeding, registration and subsequent release to the Canadian sheep industry. Small Ruminant Research 49, 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Peters, HF, Heaney, DP 1982. Growth performance of lambs sired by rams of the East Friesian, Finnish Landrace, Ile de France and Suffolk breeds. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 62, 689–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Heaney, DP, Parker, RJ 1992. Productivity of three synthetic Arcott sheep breeds and their crosses in terms of 8-month breeding cycle and artificially reared lambs. Small Ruminant Research 9, 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Boylan, WJ, Rempel, WE 2008a. Evaluation of sheep genetic resources in North America: Lamb productivity of purebred, crossbred and synthetic populations. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 88, 391–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Boylan, WJ, Rempel, WE 2008b. Evaluation of sheep genetic resources in North America: Ewe productivity of purebred, crossbred and synthetic populations. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 88, 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, JNB, Peters, HF, Heaney, DP, Van Vleck, LD 1996. Genetic trends over 20 years of selection in three synthetic Arcotts, Suffolk and Finnish Landrace sheep breeds. 1. Early growth traits. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 76, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, GM 1977. Factors affecting birth weight, dystocia and preweaning survival in sheep. Journal of Animal Science 44, 745–753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snowder, G, Shelton, M, Thompson, P 1986. Evaluation of Finn-cross and Rambouillet ewes under Texas range conditions. SID Research Digest 2, 31–35.Google Scholar
Stanford, K, Wallins, GL, Jones, SDM, Price, MA 1998. Breeding Finnish Landrace and Romanov ewes with terminal sires for out-of-season market lamb production. Small Ruminant Research 27, 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, DL 2008. Performance and utilization of Northern European short-tailed breeds of sheep and their crosses in North America: a review. Book of Abstracts of the 59th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production. Vilnius, Lithuania. No. 14, 251.Google Scholar
Thomas, DL, Whiteman, JV 1979a. Effects of substituting Finnsheep and Dorset breeding for Rambouillet breeding. I. Productivity of young, spring-lambing ewes. Journal of Animal Science 48, 256–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, DL, Whiteman, JV 1979b. Effects of substituting Finnsheep and Dorset breeding for Rambouillet breeding. II. Productivity of fall-lambing ewes. Journal of Animal Science 48, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, DL, Whiteman, JV, Walters, LE 1976. Carcass traits of lambs produced by crossbred dams of Finnsheep, Dorset and Rambouillet breeding and slaughtered at two weights. Journal of Animal Science 43, 373–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres-Hernandez, G, Hohenboken, W 1979. Genetic and environmental effects on milk production, milk composition and mastitis incidence in crossbred ewes. Journal of Animal Science 49, 410–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vesely, JA, Swierstra, EE 1986. Reproductive parameters of crossbred ewe lambs sired by Romanov, Finnish Landrace, Dorset and western range rams. Journal of Animal Science 62, 1555–1562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willingham, T, Shelton, M, Lupton, C 1988. The influence of introducing the Booroola Merino genotype to Rambouillet flocks on reproduction and fleece traits in comparison with other selected breed crosses. SID Research Journal 4, 1–5.Google Scholar
Young, LD, Fahmy, MH, Torres-Hernandez, G 1996. The use of prolific sheep in various countries – North America. In Prolific sheep (ed MH Fahmy), pp. 289–349. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar