Phenotypic and genotypic analysis of a barebreech trait in Merino sheep as a potential replacement for surgical mulesing
N. M. Edwards A , M. Hebart A and P. I. Hynd A BA Discipline of Agricultural and Animal Science, Faculty of Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: philip.hynd@adelaide.edu.au
Animal Production Science 49(1) 56-64 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA08150
Submitted: 23 April 2008 Accepted: 18 August 2008 Published: 5 January 2009
Abstract
The potential for adopting a genetic solution to protect sheep from blowfly strike on the breech was investigated in a flock of sheep that contained several animals expressing a trait characterised by low wool coverage over the breech and through a wide channel from the anus to the udder or scrotum. A scoring system (1, bare to 5, woolly) was developed and used to determine the heritability of the trait and its phenotypic and genetic correlations with other traits of importance in a sheep enterprise. In comparison to animals with woolly breeches, the skin in the breech of animals with a low bareness score was characterised by a low density of follicles producing short, medullated fibres, with histological evidence of immune rejection and follicular atrophy. The bareness score of progeny was influenced by the score of their respective sires suggesting a strong genetic component. The heritability of bareness score was moderate to high (h2 = 0.45 ± 0.02, 0.53 ± 0.01 and 0.38 ± 0.02 at lamb, hogget and adult ages, respectively). The lactation status and age of ewes influenced their bareness score, resulting in a low repeatability (0.42) of the trait between ages in females. Genetic correlations between bareness score and most other economically important traits were low. The weight of belly wool and the weight of skirtings was genetically related to bareness score (rg = +0.52 and +0.48 respectively), indicating that animals with barer breeches tend genetically towards lighter belly wool weights and lower weight of skirtings at wool classing. Selection and breeding for bareness score should achieve relatively rapid progress towards fixing the trait in a flock and without adverse effects on other important traits. Caution should be exercised in extrapolating these results to other bloodlines and environments where genetic mechanisms or environmental influences may be different.
Additional keywords: blowfly strike, mulesing alternative, sheep welfare.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to Neil, Pat, Brenton and Jane Smith of the Calcookara Stud, Cowell South Australia, for recognising the potential value of the barebreech trait for the Australian Merino sheep industry. Their assistance in allowing us access to their animals and pedigree data, and for accommodating the frequent disruptions to their enterprise, is gratefully acknowledged. The authors wish to acknowledge the research funding provided by Australian Wool Innovation Ltd.
Archer K,
Farrell R,
Swinton DA, Jackson N
(1982) Scores for variation in wool cover of sheep. Wool Technology and Sheep Breeding 30, 125–133.
Atkins KD, McGuirk BJ
(1979) Selection for Merino sheep for resistance to fleece-rot and body strike. Wool Technology and Sheep Breeding 27, 15–19.
Auber L
(1952) The anatomy of follicles producing wool fibres with special reference to keratinisation. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 62, 191–254.
Brigham PA,
Cappas A, Uno H
(1988) The stumptailed macaque as a model for androgenetic alopecia: effects of topical minoxidil analyzed by use of the folliculogram. Clinics in Dermatology 6, 177–187.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
Gilhar A,
Paus R, Kalish RS
(2007) Lymphocytes, neuropeptides, and genes involved in alopecia areata. Journal of Clinical Investigation 117, 2019–2027.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
Hebert JM,
Rosenquist T,
Gotz J, Martin GR
(1994) FGF5 as a regulator of the hair growth cycle: evidence from targeted and spontaneous mutations. Cell 78, 1017–1025.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
Hill WG, Thompson R
(1978) Probabilities of non-positive definite between-group or genetic covariance matrices. Biometrics 34, 429–439.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
James PJ
(2006) Genetic alternatives to mulesing and tail docking in sheep: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 1–18.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Johnstone IL, Graham NPH
(1941) Comparison of the incidence of crutch strike in plain-breeched sheep and in wrinkly breeched sheep treated by the mules operation. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (Australia) Journal 14, 229–232.
Morley FHW, Johnstone IL
(1984) Development and use of the mules operation. Journal of the Australian Institute of Agricultural Science 50, 86–97.
Moule GR
(1948) The case for the Mules operation. Queensland Agricultural Journal 66, 93–101.
Rathie KA,
Tierney ML, Mulder JC
(1994) Assessing Wiltshire Horn-Merino crosses. 1. Wool shedding, blowfly strike and wool production traits. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34, 717–728.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Scobie DR,
Bray AR, O’Connell D
(1999) A breeding goal to improve the welfare of sheep. Animal Welfare (South Mimms, England) 8, 391–406.
Scobie DR,
O’Connell D,
Bray AR, Cunningham P
(2002) Breech strike can be reduced by increased area of naturally bare skin around the perineum of lambs. Animal Production in Australia 24, 201–204.
Scobie DR,
O’Connell D,
Morris C, Hickey SM
(2007) A preliminary genetic analysis of breech and tail traits with the aim of improving the welfare of sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58, 161–167.
Tierney ML
(1978) Easy care Merinos through cross-breeding with Wiltshire Horn sheep. Wool Technology and Sheep Breeding 26, 21–25.
Westgate J,
Craggs RI, Gibson WT
(1991) Immune privilege in hair growth. The Journal of Investigative Dermatology 97, 417–420.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
