Register      Login
Crop and Pasture Science Crop and Pasture Science Society
Plant sciences, sustainable farming systems and food quality
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Studies on Western Australian Merino sheep. 1. Stud, strain and environmental effects on hogget performance

RP Lewer, RR Woolaston and RR Howe

Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43(6) 1381 - 1397
Published: 1992

Abstract

A 6 year study is reported of Merino studs and strains (Peppin, Collinsville and Bungaree) in Western Australia. Wool and body traits of males and females were measured, with additional subjective traits assessed on females. The effects of strain, stud (within strain), birth year, dam age, birth rearing rank, weaning age and their interactions were estimated using least squares procedures. When tested against studs, strain differences were significant for fibre diameter (both sexes), clean wool yield and about half of the subjective traits (females) but for none of the liveweights. Stud and year effects were significant for all traits, as was their interaction for most traits. Some studs were more stable between years than others in both clean fleece weight and average fibre diameter. Of the remaining effects, birth rearing rank influenced the greatest number of traits, while dam age only affected yield in ewes and some early liveweights. Peppins produced wool 2.0-2.3 microns finer than Bungarees, but not significantly different from Collinsvilles. Peppins also had the best subjective wool scores, but had the highest wrinkle scores and scored poorly on other subjective body traits. Twin-born hoggets produced 0.05-0.15 kg less clean wool than their single-born contemporaries, and their fleeces were about 0.4 microns coarser with poorer subjective qualities. Twins were also lighter from birth (by 23%) up to 17 months (by 5%) in females. Late-born lambs had higher birth weights, but lower subsequent weights, persisting until 12 months in females.

Keywords: environmental effects; wool liveweights; subjective traits

https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9921381

© CSIRO 1992

Committee on Publication Ethics


Export Citation Get Permission

View Dimensions