Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jul 16;45(1):26.
doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-45-26.

Assessment of residual body weight gain and residual intake and body weight gain as feed efficiency traits in the turkey (Meleagris gallopavo)

Affiliations

Assessment of residual body weight gain and residual intake and body weight gain as feed efficiency traits in the turkey (Meleagris gallopavo)

Owen W Willems et al. Genet Sel Evol. .

Abstract

Background: Since feed represents 70% of the total cost in poultry production systems, an animal's ability to convert feed is an important trait. In this study, residual feed intake (RFI) and residual body weight gain (RG), and their linear combination into residual feed intake and body weight gain (RIG) were studied to estimate their genetic parameters and analyze the potential differences in feed intake between the top ranked birds based on the criteria for each trait.

Methods: Phenotypic and genetic analyses were completed on 8340 growing tom turkeys that were measured for feed intake and body weight gain over a four-week period from 16 to 20 weeks of age.

Results: The heritabilities of RG and RIG were 0.19 ± 0.03 and 0.23 ± 0.03, respectively. Residual body weight gain had moderate genetic correlations with feed intake (-0.41) and body weight gain (0.43). All three linear combinations to form the RIG traits had genetic correlations ranging from -0.62 to -0.52 with feed intake, and slightly weaker, 0.22 to 0.34, with body weight gain. Sorted into three equal groups (low, medium, high) based on RG, the most efficient group (high) gained 0.62 and 1.70 kg more (P < 0.001) body weight than that of the medium and low groups, yet the feed intake for the high group was less (P < 0.05) than that of the medium group (19.52 vs. 19.75 kg). When separated into similar partitions, the high RIG group (most efficient) had both the lowest (P < 0.001) feed intake (18.86 vs. 19.57 and 20.41 kg) and the highest (P < 0.001) body weight gain (7.41 vs. 7.03 and 6.43 kg) relative to the medium and low groups, respectively.

Conclusions: The difference in feed intake between the top ranked birds based on different residual feed efficiency traits may be small when looking at the average individual, however, when extrapolated to the production level, the lower feed intake values could lead to significant savings in feed costs over time.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Arthur PF, Herd RM. Residual feed intake in beef cattle. Rev Bras Zootecn. 2008;37:269–279. doi: 10.1590/S1516-35982008001300031. - DOI
    1. Gunsett FC. Linear index selection to improve traits defined as ratios. J Anim Sci. 1984;59:1185–1193.
    1. Lin CY, Aggrey SE. Incorporation of economic values into the component traits of a ratio: Feed efficiency. Poult Sci. 2013;92:916–922. doi: 10.3382/ps.2012-02688. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Koch RM, Swiger LA, Chambers D, Gregory KE. Efficiency of feed use in beef cattle. J Anim Sci. 1963;22:486–494.
    1. Luiting P. Genetic variation of energy partitioning in laying hens: causes of variation in residual feed consumption. World Poult Sci J. 1990;46:133–152. doi: 10.1079/WPS19900017. - DOI

Publication types