Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:59:32.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Heritability of post-mixing aggressiveness in grower-stage pigs and its relationship with production traits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

S.P. Turner ,
I. M. S. White ,
S. Brotherstone ,
M. J. Farnworth ,
P. W. Knap ,
P. Penny ,
M. Mendl  and
A. B. Lawrence
S.P. Turner*
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Sir Stephen Watson Building, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0PH, UK
I. M. S. White
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, UK
S. Brotherstone
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Sir Stephen Watson Building, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0PH, UK
M. J. Farnworth
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Sir Stephen Watson Building, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0PH, UK
P. W. Knap
Affiliation:
PIC International Group, Ratsteich 31, 24837 Schleswig, Germany
P. Penny
Affiliation:
JSR Farming Group, Southburn, Driffield, East Yorkshire, YO25 9ED, UK
M. Mendl
Affiliation:
Centre for Behavioural Biology, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford, BS40 5DU, UK
A. B. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Sir Stephen Watson Building, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0PH, UK
*
†Email: simon.turner@sac.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

Mixing of commercial pigs frequently leads to intense aggression. Considerable phenotypic variation exists between individuals and selection against aggressiveness may offer a long-term reduction in aggression without incurring additional costs to the primary producer. The genetic contribution to aggressiveness was quantified in this study using the number of skin lesions as an indicator of involvement in aggression. A sample of 1132 pigs were mixed at an average weight of 27·9 (s.d. 4·6) kg into 96 pens on a commercial sire line nucleus unit. Post-mixing aggressiveness of pigs was assessed using the lesion score (LS) approach. Growth rate, between 27·9 and 91·9 kg, and backfat depth at 91·9 kg were recorded for a subsample of 658 pigs. With a pedigree file of 1947 animals, a heritability of 0·22 was estimated for the LS trait. No significant genetic or phenotypic correlations were found between LS and growth rate or backfat depth, but standard errors of estimates were large. The response to selection, when all selection pressure was placed on the LS trait, was a 25% reduction in LS per generation. It is therefore technically possible to select for a reduced LS without substantially inhibiting genetic progress in growth rate or backfat depth through antagonistic genetic relationships.

Keywords

aggressionheritabilitylesionspigsselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 82 , Issue 5 , October 2006 , pp. 615 - 620
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2006

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

Arey, D. S. and Edwards, S. A. 1998. Factors influencing aggression between sows after mixing and the consequences for welfare and production. Livestock Production Science 56: 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benus, R. F., Bohus, B., Koolhaas, J. M. and Van Oortmerssen, G. A. 1991. Heritable variation for aggression as a reflection of individual coping strategies. Experientia 47: 1008–1019.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanchard, R. J., Flannelly, K. J. and Blanchard, D. C. 1988a. Life-span studies of dominance and aggression in established colonies of laboratory rats. Physiology and Behaviour 43: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanchard, R. J., Hori, K., Tom, P. and Blanchard, D. C. 1988b. Social dominance and individual aggressiveness. Aggressive Behaviour 14: 195–203.Google Scholar
Burrow, H. M. 1997. Measurements of temperament and their relationships with performance traits of beef cattle. Animal Breeding Abstracts 65: 477–495.Google Scholar
Clutter, A. C. and Brascamp, E. W. 1998. Genetics of performance traits, In The genetics of the pig (ed. Rothschild, M. F. and Ruvinsky, A.), pp. 427–462. CAB International, New York.Google Scholar
D'Eath, R. B. 2003. Consistency in resident-intruder aggression during development in pre-pubertal pigs. Proceedings of the Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour summer meetingGrűnau, Austria, p. 49 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Eley, T. C.Lichtenstein, P. and Moffitt, T. E. 2003. A longitudinal behavioural genetic analysis of the etiology of aggressive and nonaggressive antisocial behaviour. Development and Psychopathology 15: 383–402.Google Scholar
Erhard, H. W. and Mendl, M. 1997. Measuring aggressiveness in growing pigs in a resident-intruder situation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erhard, H. W., Mendl, M. and Ashley, D. D. 1997. Individual aggressiveness of pigs can be measured and used to reduce aggression after mixing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewbank, R. 1976. Social hierarchy in suckling and fattening pigs: a review. Livestock Production Science 3: 363–372.Google Scholar
Fernandez, X., Meunier-Salaun, M. C. and Mormé de, P. 1994. Agonistic behaviour, plasma stress hormones, and metabolites in response to dyadic encounters in domestic pigs: Interrelationships and effect of dominance status. Physiology and Behaviour 56: 841–847.Google Scholar
Forkman, B., Furuhaug, I. L. and Jensen, P. 1995. Personality, coping patterns, and aggression in piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45: 31–42.Google Scholar
Francis, R. C. 1990. Temperament in a fish – a longitudinal study of the development of individual differences in aggression and social rank in the Midas cichlid. Ethology 86: 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandison, K., Rydhmer, L., Strandberg, E. and Thodberg, K. 2003. Genetic analysis of on-farm tests of maternal behaviour in sows. Livestock Production Science 83: 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guhl, A. M., Craig, J. V. and Mueller, C. D. 1960. Selective breeding for aggressiveness in chickens. Poultry Science 39: 970–980.Google Scholar
Harper, S. J. and Batzli, G. O. 1997. Are staged dyadic encounters useful for studying aggressive behaviour of arvicoline rodents? Canadian Journal of Zoology 75: 1051–1058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hood, K. E. and Cairns, R. B. 1989. A developmental-genetic analysis of aggressive behaviour in mice: IV. Genotype-environment interaction. Aggressive Behaviour 15: 361–380.Google Scholar
Janczak, A. M., Pedersen, L. J. and Bakken, M. 2003. Aggression, fearfulness and coping styles in female pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 13–28.Google Scholar
Jensen, P. 1994. Fighting between unacquainted pigs – effects of age and of individual reaction pattern. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 41: 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knap, P. W. and Merks, J. W.M. 1987. A note on the genetics of aggressiveness of primiparous sows towards their piglets. Livestock Production Science 17: 161–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loeber, R. and Hay, D. 1997. Key issues in the development of aggression and violence from childhood to early adulthood. Annual Review of Psychology 48: 371–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luescher, U. A., Friendship, R. M. and McKeown, D. B. 1990. Evaluation of methods to reduce fighting among regrouped gilts. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 70: 363–370.Google Scholar
McGlone, J. J. 1985. A quantitative ethogram of aggressive and submissive behaviours in recently regrouped pigs. Journal of Animal Science 61: 559–565.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission 2002. Control of PMWS and PDNS. Meat and Livestock Commission, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
Mendl, M. 1993. Are aggressiveness and social status of group housed sows predictable from observations of earlier behaviour. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science1993 pp. 87.Google Scholar
Mendl, M. and Deag, J. M. 1995. How useful are the concepts of alternative strategy and coping strategy in applied studies of social behaviour? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 44: 119–137.Google Scholar
Miczek, K. A., Maxson, S. C., Fish, E. W. and Faccidomo, S. 2001. Aggressive behavioural phenotypes in mice. Behavioural Brain Research 125: 167–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mount, N. C. and Seabrook, M. F. 1993. A study of aggression when group housed sows are mixed. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36: 377–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petherick, J. C. and Blackshaw, J. K. 1987. A review of the factors influencing the aggressive and agonistic behaviour of the domestic pig. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 27: 605–611.Google Scholar
Rothschild, M. F. and Bidanel, J. P. 1998. Biology and genetics of reproduction. In The genetics of the pig (ed.Rothschild, M. F. and Ruvinsky, A.), pp. 313–344. CAB International, New York.Google Scholar
Rundgren, M. and Löfquist, I. 1989. Effects on performance and behaviour of mixing 20 kg pigs fed individually. Animal Production 49: 311–315.Google Scholar
Tan, S. S.L., Shackleton, D. M. and Beames, R. M. 1991. The effect of mixing unfamiliar individuals on the growth and production of finishing pigs. Animal Production 52: 201–206.Google Scholar
Turner, S. P., Farnworth, M. J., White, I. M.S., Brotherstone, S., Mendl, M., Knap, P. and Penny, P. and Lawrence, A.B. 2006. The accumulation of skin lesions and their use as a predictor of individual aggressiveness in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 96: 245–259.Google Scholar
Van Oortmerssen, G. A. and Bakker, T. C.M. 1981. Artificial selection for short and long attack latencies in wild Mus musculus domesticus. Behaviour Genetics 11: 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vangen, O., Holm, B., Rossly, T., Vasbotten, M.Valros, A. and Rydhmer, L. 2002. Genetic variation in maternal behaviour of sows. Proceedings of the seventh world congress on genetics applied to livestock productionMontpellier CD-ROM communication number 14–12.Google Scholar
Weary, D. M. and Fraser, D. 1999. Partial tooth-clipping of suckling pigs: effects on neonatal competition and facial injuries. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 65: 21–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar