Subscribe Now Subscribe Today
Research Article
 

The Effect of Bilateral Crossbreeding between Arkhamerino and Ghezel Sheep on the Quality of Wool of Their F1 Crosses



T. Farahvash, J. Shodja, A. Rafat and A. Keshtkaran
 
Facebook Twitter Digg Reddit Linkedin StumbleUpon E-mail
ABSTRACT

In order to study the effect of bilateral crossbreeding between Arkhamerino (Ar) and Ghezel (G) sheep on the quality of wool produced by their F1 crosses, 16 ArkhamerinoxGhezel (ArG) F1 sheep and 53 GhezelxArkhamerino (GAr) F1 sheep were sampled. Fiber Diameter (FD), Coefficient of variation of fiber diameter (CVf) and Staple Length (SL) were traits measured on wool samples. The variations between obtained data were analyzed for genotype, sex and birth type. The results showed that the FD was not affected by any of the factors in model. Genotype, had significant effect on CVf and SL (p<0.01) and the effect of sex on the SL was significant (p<0.01). Also twin F1s produced longer staples than single crosses (p<0.01). Bilateral crossbreeding between Ar and Gh sheep did not make considerable changes in FD of wool produced by their F1 crossbreds but CVf and SL of wool have been influenced.

Services
Related Articles in ASCI
Search in Google Scholar
View Citation
Report Citation

 
  How to cite this article:

T. Farahvash, J. Shodja, A. Rafat and A. Keshtkaran, 2011. The Effect of Bilateral Crossbreeding between Arkhamerino and Ghezel Sheep on the Quality of Wool of Their F1 Crosses. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 6: 397-400.

DOI: 10.3923/ajava.2011.397.400

URL: https://scialert.net/abstract/?doi=ajava.2011.397.400

INTRODUCTION

In developing countries, raising sheep and goat due to their good adaptation to the poor feeding conditions, has increased. This is why the sheep and goat raising is an important branch of domestic industry (Odabasogluo et al., 2009). As a result, the necessity of raising animals those have the potential for higher production to be felt. Crossbreeding programs are designed with the aim to increase livestock production capability through the use of genetic potential of breeds and heterosis effects from their crossbreds on important economic traits (Lupton et al., 2004). In sheep and goat, many crossbreeding experiments have been conducted that typically but not always are mainly focused on improving meat and lamb production. Since milk and wool production are known as a product of interest in sheep and goat, it is recommended that in crossbreeding programs factors such as wool production and quality, should be considered (Lupton et al., 2004). In the most of crossbreeding programs, having the highest hybrid vigor in F1 crosses is very important. Also some traits may influenced by the breed of mother or sire of crosses (Pitchford, 1992). It seems that doing bilateral crossbreeding between parents may makes different hybrid vaguer in offspring.

In this study, the objective was to see if bilateral crossbreeding between parents affected the quality of wool of F1 crosses and whether relocation parents, was able to create changes in wool traits.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

General experimental design: This study was conducted in Agriculture Research Institute of Khalat Poushan (University of Tabriz, Iran) in 2002. Sheep raised under semi-intensive breeding system with the same management conditions. During the spring, summer and autumn sheep grazed in local pastures. During winter they were fed Barley grain as extra food. Tow flock of Arkhamerino and Ghezel sheep crossed.

Arkhamerino (Ar) is a fine wool breed that synthesized in Kurminitsky Research Institute of Kazakistan by crossing between Arkhar rames and Merino ewes. The fleece of this breed is a suitable material in textile industry.

Ghezel (G) is a native sheep from East Azebijan province of Iran that produces coarse and colorful wool but it is well adapted to the mountainous condition of this state.

Wool measurements: Wool samples collected from mid- side of 16 ArG F1 sheep (Ar as maternal and G as paternal) and 53 GAr F1 sheep (G as maternal and Ar as paternal) at 15 month age (Tabbaa et al., 2001). Samples sent to the Wool and Skin Research Laboratory (University of Tabriz) and 3 staples removed from random positions in each sample and measured using a standard method (ASTM, 1996). Mean values of SL calculated.

Subsequently samples washed. Clean samples were minicored to produce short pieces of fiber, approximately 2 mm in length by using wool microtum and measured for mean fiber diameter and SD (Lupton, 1995) using a Projection Microscope (BK2 4014, with power zoom of 300X) and a standard method (ASTM, 1989). For each sample CVf calculated (McGregor and Butler, 2009).

Statistical analysis: Data collected on F1 crosses were analyzed using the fix model of variance procedure in SAS version 6.12 (SAS, 1989; Soltani, 1996). Statistical model used was:

Image for - The Effect of Bilateral Crossbreeding between Arkhamerino and Ghezel Sheep on the Quality of Wool of Their F1 Crosses

In this model Ai: effect of Genotype, Sj: effect of sex and Tk: effect of birth type.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In Table 1, the least square mean values of wool traits separated by factors in model are shown. ArG and GAr had same FD but GAr crosses produced longer staples with higher CVf. F1's had no significant difference in FD and CVf in both sexes but F1 ewes had higher SL. Also single and twine crosses produced fibers with similar diameter despite singles produced longer fibers.

Table 1: Least square mean values of wool traits separated by the factors in model
Image for - The Effect of Bilateral Crossbreeding between Arkhamerino and Ghezel Sheep on the Quality of Wool of Their F1 Crosses
**Significant probability at 0.01

Genotype: Genotype had no effect on FD of fibers produced by two crossbred groups. Taherpour et al. (2000) in comparison of wool of Iranian and Saffulk F1 crossbreds and Brash et al. (1994) in their evaluation of direct and maternal genetic effects on wool quality, reported that genotype had no effect on FD. Sidwel et al. (1971) showed that FD did not influenced by genotype but Lupton et al. (2004) compared wool of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel and Montadal crossbreds and indicated the effect of genotype on FD. Chougulae et al. (1988) reported that genotype significantly affected FD in Deccani, Merino and Dorset crossbreds. Also they indicated MerinoxDeccani crossbreds had finner wool than DeccanixDorset sheep. Ganai and Pandey (1993) in their experiment, crossbreeding between Rambouillet and Australian Merino with Indian breeds, showed that FD influenced by genotype and Merino crossbreds had lower FD. Odabasogluo et al. (2009) suggested that genotype had effect on FD of Angora goatxColored Mohair goat F1 kids.

Cvf influenced by genotype (p<0.01) and ArG crossbreds produced fibers with lower CVf. Sidwel et al. (1971) crossed some pure English breeds and showed that genotype significantly affected CVf in F1 crosses.

Sl differed between tow F1 groups (p<0.01) and ArG sheep had longer SL. Chougulae et al. (1988) indicated that Deccanix Merino F1 crosses had longer SL than DeccanixDorset. Ganai and Pandey (1993) and Lupton et al. (2004) reported that genotype had effect on SL.

Sex: Sex had significant effect on SL (p<0.01) and F1 ewes had longer staples.

Kahyayi (2001) in his estimation of genetic and phenotypic parameters of Moghani sheep and Tabbaa et al. (2001) in evaluation of fleece characteristics of Awassi sheep, reported same results but Odabasogluo et al. (2009) and Taherpour and Salehi (2000) indicated no effect of sex on SL.

Birth type: Birth type affected SL (p<0.01) and single F1 crosses had longer staples. Aimone et al. (1999) measured shorter SL in MerinoxRambouillet single F1 crosses. Sidwel et al. (1971) and Ganai and Pandey (1993) showed that birth type had no effect on FD.

CONCLUSION

As a general conclusion, it seems that bilateral crossbreeding between Arkhamerino and Ghezel sheep did not make considerable changes in FD of wool produced by their F1 crossbreds, but CVf and SL of tow crossbred groups influenced.

REFERENCES

  1. Aimone, C.S., R.H. Stobart, R.S. Townsend, H.A. Glimp, D. Holcomb and C.R. Russell, 1999. Comparison of wool and skin parameters between Merino crossbred and Rambouillet yearling ewes. Sheep Goat Res. J., 15: 1-1.


  2. ASTM, 1989. Designation: D2130-90, Standard test method for diameter of wool and other animal fibers by micro projection. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.


  3. ASTM, 1996. Designation: D1234-96, Standard test method of sampling and testing staple length of grease wool. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.


  4. Brash, L.D., N.M. Fogarty and A.R. Gilmour, 1994. Genetic parameters for Australian maternal and dual-purpose meat sheep breeds. I. Live weight, wool-production and reproduction in Border Leicester and related types. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 45: 459-468.


  5. Chougulae, B.A., A.P. Deshmukh and G.D. Patil, 1988. Fleece production and quality of wool of Deccani and their half-bred with Dorset and Merino. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 65: 242-244.


  6. Ganai, T.A.S. and R.S. Pandey, 1993. Comparison of wool traits of Rambouillet and its grades with Australian Merino. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 63: 783-784.
    Direct Link  |  


  7. Kahyayi, A.M., 2001. Determinatione the genetic and phenotypic parameters of body weight and wool production in Moghani sheep. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Animal Science Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz.


  8. Lupton, C.J., 1995. Standard deviation of fiber diameter and other characteristics of United States wool. Sheep Goat Res. J., 11: 111-121.


  9. Lupton, C.J., B.A. Freking and K.A. Leymaster, 2004. Evaluation of Dorset, Finnsheep, Romanov, Texel and Montadal breeds of sheep: III. Wool characteristics of F1 ewes. J. Anim. Sci., 89: 2293-2300.


  10. McGregor, B.A. and K.L. Butler, 2009. Variation of fiber diameter variation of fiber diameter and fiber creature across mohair fleeces: Implication for animal selection, genetic selection and fleece evaluation. Small Rumin. Res., 85: 1-10.


  11. Odabasogluo, F., M. Kucuk and O. Yılmaz, 2009. Investigation of Mohair production, clean yield and fiber characteristics in colored Mohair goat and F1 cross-bred kids of Angora goat x Colored Mohair goat. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 33: 7-13.
    Direct Link  |  


  12. Pitchford, W.S., 1992. Effect of crossbreeding on components of hogget wool production. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 43: 1417-1427.
    Direct Link  |  


  13. SAS, 1989. User's Guide. Version 6.12, SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC


  14. Sidwel, G.M., R.L. Wilson and M.E. Hourihon, 1971. Production in some pure breeds of sheep and their crosses. IV. Effect of crossbreeding on wool production. J. Anim. Sci., 32: 1099-1102.
    Direct Link  |  


  15. Soltani, A., 1996. Use of SAS Software for Statistical Analysis in Agriculture. University of Mashhad Publishing Inc., Iran, pp: 167


  16. Tabbaa, M.J., W.A. Al-Azzawi and D. Campbell, 2001. Variation in fleece characteristics of Awassi sheep at different ages. Small Rumin. Res., 41: 95-100.
    Direct Link  |  


  17. Taherpour, N. and M. Salehi, 2000. Age and sex effect on wool of Arabic sheep. Proceedings of the 1st Seminar of Skin, Leather and Animal Fibers of Iran, (SSLAFI'00), Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, pp: 253-263


  18. Taherpour, N., M. Salehi and M. Monem, 2000. Comparison of wool characteristics in Iranian and Suffolk crossbreds. Proceedings of the 1st Seminar of Skin, Leather and Animal Fibers of Iran, (SSLAFI'00), Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, pp: 87-95


©  2022 Science Alert. All Rights Reserved