Czech J. Anim. Sci.

, 60, 2015 (6): 281–288 Original Paper

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

Estimation of genetic parameters for reproductive traits

in Mehraban sheep
R. Yavarifard, N. Ghavi Hossein-Zadeh, A.A. Shadparvar

Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

ABSTRACT: Genetic parameters for basic and composite reproductive traits in Mehraban sheep were esti-
mated. Data included 10 257 records on reproductive performances of 5813 lambs from 69 sires and 603 dams
which were collected from 1994 to 2011 in the Mehraban breeding station in Hamedan province, western Iran.
Studied traits were litter size at birth (LSB), litter size at weaning (LSW), litter mean weight per lamb born
(LMWLB), litter mean weight per lamb weaned (LMWLW), total litter weight at birth (TLWB), and total litter
weight at weaning (TLWW). Test of significance to include fixed effects in the statistical model was performed
using the GLM procedure of SAS. Genetic parameters were estimated with univariate and bivariate repeat-
ability animal models using WOMBAT program. Direct heritability estimates were 0.16, 0.14, 0.03, 0.16, 0.06,
and 0.18 for LSB, LSW, LMWLB, LMWLW, TLWB, and TLWW, respectively, and corresponding repeatabili-
ties were 0.02, 0.01, 0.73, 0.41, 0.27, and 0.03. The estimate for animal-dependent permanent environmental
variance ranged from 0.01 ± 0.04 for LMWLW to 0.23 ± 0.04 for LSB. Genetic correlation estimates between
traits ranged from −0.98 for LSB–LMWLW to 0.99 for LSB–TLWB. Phenotypic and environmental correlations
were generally lower than genetic correlations. Phenotypic correlations ranged from −0.50 for LSB–LMWLB
to 0.85 for LMWLW–TLWW. Environmental correlations ranged from −0.45 for LSB–LMWLB to 0.87 for
LMWLW–TLWW. The results suggested that indirect selection based on TLWW could improve the reproduc-
tive performance in Mehraban ewes more effectively than if based on the other traits.

Keywords: heritability; genetic correlation; litter size; fat-tailed sheep

INTRODUCTION factors affecting production rate in livestock and

reproductive traits are the most important traits
In the world of agriculture, sheep breeding is affecting profitability in sheep breeding (Hanford
one of the most important branches of livestock et al. 2003) and improvement of these traits leads
in terms of the number of animals and the value of to more efficient lamb production. The improve-
the products. Sheep are important due to having ment of environmental conditions (management
several desirable features such as compromises in and nutrition) and the use of genetic selection
different environmental conditions, low demand were considered as two main ways for improving
for food, and value of sheep products (Ensminger reproductive efficiency in sheep (Fogarty 1995).
and Parker 1986). Sheep products constitute an Previously, researchers identified the increas-
important component of livestock production in ing number of lambs at birth or weaning as the
Iran. There are nearly 50 million sheep with more only useful criterion to improve reproductive ef-
than 20 breeds in Iran (Vatankhah et al. 2004). ficiency or net reproductive rate and total weight
The aims of breeding programs are to maximize of lamb(s) weaned per ewe joined or per lambing
the rate of genetic progress for economic traits was proposed as the trait of interest in sheep breed-
in livestock species. Reproductive traits are the ing (Fogarty 1995; Cloete et al. 2004). Therefore,
most important traits in all sheep production ewe productivity could be improved by increas-
systems (Gallivan 1996; Matika et al. 2003). Re- ing the number and weight of lambs weaned per
productive efficiency is one of the most important ewe within a specific year (Duguma et al. 2002).

281
Original Paper Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

The increase in the number of reared lambs per three million heads) is the predominant breed in
maintained ewes can be considered as the increase this province, reared primarily for meat produc-
of fertility, lambing, number of lambs at birth and tion. Mehraban is a fat-tailed carpet wool sheep
lamb weaning. with light brown, cream or grey colour, with dark
Estimates of genetic parameters have been pub- face and neck . Ewes were exposed to rams at
lished for reproductive characteristics of different about 18 months of age. There was a controlled
sheep breeds by several authors (van Wyk et al. mating system and each mating group including
2003; Ekiz et al. 2005; Hanford et al. 2006; Ghavi 10–15 ewes was set aside to a ram. Rams were
Hossein-Zadeh and Ardalan 2010; Mokhtari et al. selected at one year of age from some purebred
2010; Rashidi et al. 2011; Amou Posht-e-Masari flocks and were assigned to local flocks under
et al. 2013; Mohammadabadi and Sattayimokhtari supervision of the Breeding Station of Mehraban
2013). Sheep. The mating period was from the end of
However, genetic parameters for reproductive September to the end of October. Lambing was
traits of Mehraban sheep have not been estimated commenced in March. During the lambing season,
until now. Hence, the reliable estimates of genetic the ewes were indoors and carefully managed.
parameters are needed for constructing breeding After lambing, the ewes and their lamb(s) were
programs in this breed of sheep. Thus, the objective placed in separate pens and kept there for a few
of this study was to estimate heritability, repeat- days, depending on the number of lambs born and
ability, and genetic correlations of reproductive the ewe’s rearing ability. Then a flock composed of
traits for Mehraban sheep which are essential for suckling lambs and their dams was formed. Dur-
developing efficient selection programs for the ing the suckling period, lambs were kept indoors
improvement of reproduction. and additionally fed with hay grass. Ewes were
kept in the flock up to 7 years of age. Ewes usually
MATERIAL AND METHODS give birth to lambs three times every two years.
All lambs were weighed and ear tagged within
Data. The data set and pedigree information 12 h after the birth. The lambs were weaned at
used in this research were reproductive traits of around 90 days of age. Flocks were grazing dur-
Mehraban ewes collected at the Breeding Station ing the daytime and housed at night.
of Mehraban Sheep, located at Kabudarahang City, Studied traits. The analyzed traits can be clas-
Hamedan province, Iran during a 18-year period sified as basic and composite traits. Basic traits
(1994–2011). Data included 10 257 records on were litter size at birth (LSB), litter size at weaning
reproductive performance of 5813 lambs from (LSW), litter mean weight per lamb born (LMWLB),
69 sires and 603 dams. This breed of sheep origi- and litter mean weight per lamb weaned (LMWLW).
nates from the western province of Iran known LSB was the number of lambs born alive per ewe
as Hamedan and is adapted to harsh and rocky lambing (1, 2) and LSW was the number of lambs
environments. The Mehraban (approximately weaned per ewe lambing (0, 1, 2). LMWLB and

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of data used in the analysis

Traits
LSB LSW LMWLB (kg) LMWLW (kg) TLWB (kg) TLWW (kg)
No. of records 10 275 10 275 10 275 10 275 10 275 10 275
Mean (kg) 1.12 0.76 3.67 22.07 4.35 28.04
SD (kg) 0.33 0.72 0.76 4.24 1.28 12.52
CV (%) 29.46 94.73 20.74 19.21 29.33 44.65
Min. 1 0 1.4 9 1.4 9
Max. 2 3 6 35.70 15 105

LSB = litter size at birth, LSW = litter size at weaning, LMWLB = litter mean weight per lamb born, LMWLW = litter mean
weight per lamb weaned, TLWB = total litter weight at birth, TLWW = total litter weight at weaning, SD = standard devia-
tion, CV = coefficient of variation

282
Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288 Original Paper

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

LMWLW were the average weights of lambs from Y = Xb + Za + Wpe + e

the same parity at birth and weaning, respectively.
Composite traits were total litter weight at birth where:
per ewe lambing (TLWB) and total litter weight at Y = vector of observations
weaning per ewe lambing (TLWW). TLWB refers b = vector of fixed effects
to the sum of the birth weights of all lambs born a = vector of direct additive genetic effects
per ewe lambed and TLWW refers to the sum of pe = vector of permanent environmental effects
the weights of all lambs weaned per ewe lambed. e = vector of residual effects
Statistical analyses. Fixed factors affecting X, Z, W = incidence matrices relating the correspond-
reproductive traits were identified by prelimi- ing effects to observations
nary analysis using the GLM procedure of SAS Repeatability (r) was calculated as:
(Statistical Analysis System, Version 9.1, 2003).
σ2a + σ2pe
The fixed effects included in the final statisti- r=
cal models were flock-year-season, lamb sex in σ2p
2 classes (male and female), dam age at lambing
where:
in 6 classes (2–7 years), and interaction between
σ2a = additive genetic variance
them for all traits as well as effect of birth type in
σ2pe = permanent environmental variance
3 classes (single, twin, and triplet) for LBWLW,
σ2p = phenotypic variance
LMWLW, TLWB, and TLWW. Lamb age at wean-
ing (in days) was fitted as a covariate for LMWLW Genetic, phenotypic, and environmental correla-
and TLWW. Descriptive statistics of the data set tions were estimated using bivariate analyses with
is shown in Table 1. Also pedigree information the same fixed effects fitted in univariate models.
of the Mehraban sheep is presented in Table 2.
The variance components for the investigated RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
traits were estimated by restricted maximum like-
lihood method, using WOMBAT (2006) program Fixed effects. The Least Squares Means and their
using the following repeatability animal model: standard errors are presented in Table 3. Flock-year-

Table 2. Characteristics of the pedigree structure

Traits
LSB LSW LMWB LMWW TLWB TLWW
No. of records 10 257 10 257 10 257 10 257 10 257 10 257
No. of ewes with 1 record 5 813 5 813 5 813 5 813 5 813 5 813
No. of ewes with 2 records 3 221 3 221 3 221 3 221 3 221 3 221
No. of ewes with 3 records 1 533 1 533 1 533 1 533 1 533 1 533
No. of ewes with 4 records 590 590 590 590 590 590
No. of ewes with 5 records 260 260 260 260 260 260
No. of ewes with 6 records 79 79 79 79 79 79
No. of sire of the ewes 69 69 69 69 69 69
No. of dam of the ewes 603 603 603 603 603 603
No. of dam of the ewes with records 578 578 578 578 578 578
No. of animals with sire unknown 5 445 5 445 5 445 5 445 5 445 5 445
No. of animals with dam unknown 5 126 5 126 5 126 5 126 5 126 5 126
No. of animals with both parents unknown 4 817 4 817 4 817 4 817 4 817 4 817
No. of animals with records and both parents unknown 4 723 4 723 4 723 4 723 4 723 4 723

LSB = litter size at birth, LSW = litter size at weaning, LMWLB = litter mean weight per lamb born, LMWLW = litter mean
weight per lamb weaned, TLWB = total litter weight at birth, TLWW = total litter weight at weaning

283
Original Paper Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

Table 3. Fixed effects of environmental factors on reproductive traits in Mehraban sheep

Traits
Fixed effects Class
LSB LSW LMWLB LMWLW TLWB TLWW
Flock-year-season ** ** ** ** ** **
ns ns ** ** ** **
a a a
Lamb sex male 3.79 ± 0.01 22.24 ± 0.16 4.51 ± 0.02 28.55 ± 0.24a
b b b
female 3.58 ± 0.01 21.90 ± 0.15 4.20 ± 0.02 27.52 ± 0.23b
– – ** ** ** **
single 3.89 ± 0.001a 21.94 ± 0.06c 3.89 ± 0.01c 21.94 ± 0.06c
Birth type
twins 2.98 ± 0.001b 22.40 ± 0.10b 5.96 ± 0.03b 44.77 ± 0.21b
triplet 2.48 ± 0.05c 23.16 ± 0.33a 7.43 ± 0.15a 69.56 ± 0.99a
ns ns * * * *
2 3.67 ± 0.001c 21.12 ± 0.19bc 4.28 ± 0.02b 26.75 ± 0.28d
3 3.76 ± 0.01b 22.08 ± 0.20ab 4.35 ± 0.02ab 28.42 ± 0.36a
Dam age 4 3.87 ± 0.01a 22.41 ± 0.24a 4.40 ± 0.03a 28.84 ± 0.29a
bc a ab
5 3.74 ± 0.01 22.83 ± 0.35 4.31 ± 0.04 27.75 ± 0.50b
6 3.69 ± 0.02bc 21.95 ± 0.60b 4.32 ± 0.06ab 26.08 ± 0.86b
c c c
7 3.66 ± 0.005 20.59 ± 1.08 4.18 ± 0.10 23.838 ± 1.44c
– – – ** – **
Lamb age at weighing
0.04 ± 0.003 0.28 ± 0.002

LSB = litter size at birth, LSW = litter size at weaning, LMWLB = litter mean weight per lamb born, LMWLW = litter mean
weight per lamb weaned, TLWB = total litter weight at birth, TLWW = total litter weight at weaning
*significant at P < 0.05, **significant at P < 0.01, ns = non-significant (P > 0.05)
a–c
different letters within the same column indicate significant differences

season significantly affected all traits (P < 0.01). a limited amount of available milk for twin and
The significant influence of lambing year can be triplet lambs. Triplet-born lambs showed higher
described by the variation in the climate condi- performance for LMWLW, TLWB, and TLWW
tions and dependence of sheep to pastures, man- than single- and twin-born. The highest perfor-
agement and breeding conditions of mothers and mance was recorded approximately in 3-year-old
lambs feeding in various years. Significant effects dams for LMWLB, LMWLW, TLWB, and TLWW.
of year on reproductive traits have been reported The lowest performance was recorded in 2- and
by several authors (Vatankhah et al. 2008; Mo- 7-year-old dams for LMWLB and 7-year-old dams
hammadi et al. 2012; Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. for LMWLW, TLWB, and TLWW. There was a
2013; Mohammadabadi and Sattayimokhtari 2013). tendency for the productivity of ewes to improve
All traits except LSB and LSW were significantly with age, generally reaching a maximum between
influenced by lamb sex, birth type (P < 0.01), and three and six years of age for LMWLB, LMWLW,
dam age (P < 0.05). LMWLW and TLWW were TLWB, and TLWW. There was a general tendency
significantly influenced by lamb age (P < 0.01). for LMWLB, LMWLW, TLBW, and TLWW to
The mean value for males was higher than for fe- improve with an increase in dam age. Differences
males for LMWLB, LMWLW, TLWB, and TLWW, in maternal effects and maternal behaviour of ewe
which is consistent with the results reported by at different ages are the reasons for the significant
Vatankhah and Talebi (2008). LMWLB for single- effects of dam age on reproductive traits. Signifi-
born lambs was significantly (P < 0.05) higher cant effects of dam age on reproductive traits of
than that for the twin- and triplet-born lambs. sheep have been reported in literature (Ceyhan
This result is similar to the results reported by et al. 2009; Rashidi et al. 2011; Mohammadi et al.
Vatankhah et al. (2008) and can be explained by 2012; Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. 2013; Moham-
low body weight, unfavourable body condition, and madabadi and Sattayimokhtari 2013).

284
Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288 Original Paper

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

Table 4. Variance components and genetic parameter estimates for reproductive traits

LSB LSW LMWB LMWW TLWB TLWW

σ2a 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.72 0.03 1.88
σ2pe 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.00004 0.03 0.45
σ2p 0.15 0.20 0.31 4.42 0.45 10.45
σ2e 0.09 0.15 0.25 3.70 0.39 8.12
h2a ± SE 0.16 ± 0.04 0.14 ± 0.04 0.03 ± 0.01 0.16 ± 0.04 0.06 ± 0.04 0.18 ± 0.05
2
pe ± SE 0.23 ± 0.04 0.08 ± 0.04 0.16 ± 0.04 0.001 ± 0.04 0.07 ± 0.04 0.04 ± 0.05
r 0.40 0.25 0.19 0.16 0.13 0.22

σ2a = additive genetic variance, σ2pe = permanent environmental variance, σ2e = residual variance, σ2p = phenotypic vari-
ance, h2a = direct heritability, pe2 = ratio of permanent environmental variance to phenotypic variance, r = repeatability,
SE = standard error, LSB = litter size at birth, LSW = litter size at weaning, LMWLB = litter mean weight per lamb born,
LMWLW = litter mean weight per lamb weaned, TLWB = total litter weight at birth, TLWW = total litter weight at weaning

Variance components and genetic parameters. The estimate of direct heritability for LMWLW
Estimates of variance components, heritability, (0.16) was in the range of estimates reported by
ratio of permanent environmental variance to previous authors (Mokhtari et al. 2010; Rashidi et
phenotypic variance, and repeatability for each al. 2011; Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. 2013).
trait are shown in Table 4. The estimate of direct TLWB shows the reproductive potential of the
heritability for LSB (0.16) was higher than the ewes for the weight of lambs born per birth regard-
estimates reported by previous authors (Rashidi less of their number (Rosati et al. 2002; Vatankhah
et al. 2011; Mohamadi et al. 2012; Amou Posht- et al. 2008; Mokhtari et al. 2010; Rashidi et al. 2011).
e-Masari et al. 2013; Mohammadabadi and Sat- Direct heritability of TLWB (0.06) was identical to
tayimokhtari 2013). the estimated value of this trait by Mokhtari et al.
Direct heritability estimate for LSW was 0.14, (2010) in Kermani sheep (0.06) and it was lower
which was in the range of estimates reported by than that reported in the literature (Rashidi et al.
previous authors. Heritability estimate for this 2011; Mohamadi et al. 2012; Amou Posht-e-Masari
trait varied from 0.01 to 0.189 (Bromley et al. et al. 2013; Mohammadabadi and Sattayimokhtari
2001; Rosati et al. 2002; van Wyk et al. 2003; Va- 2013). The low heritability of the reproductive
nimisetti et al. 2007; Ceyhan et al. 2008; Amou traits indicates that a direct selection based on
Posht-e-Masari et al. 2013). Lower heritability for each of these traits does not considerably improve
LSW, compared with the heritability estimate for reproductive efficiency in this population.
LSB, suggested that the loss of lambs from birth TLWW is an economically important trait that
to weaning is influenced mainly by environmental reflects the reproductive and maternal ability of
factors such as a particular disease and mortality the ewe for lamb survival and growth during the
of lambs. pre-weaning period (Rashidi et al. 2011). The her-
The estimate of direct heritability for LMWLB itability estimate for TLWW was 0.18. Mokhtari
was 0.03. The reported estimates of heritability for et al. (2010) reported that the direct heritability
LMWLB were 0.47, 0.07, and 0.13 in Shall sheep for this trait was 0.18 which was the same value as
(Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. 2013), Moghani sheep calculated in the present research. This estimate
(Rashidi et al. 2011), and in Kermani sheep (Mokh- was in the range of 0.03–0.4 as reported by several
tari et al. 2010), respectively, i.e. they were higher authors (Rosati et al. 2002; van Wyk et al. 2003;
than the current estimate. Lower heritability esti- Mohamadi et al. 2012; Amou Posht-e-Masari et
mate for LMWLB showed that this trait has been al. 2013; Mohammadabadi and Sattayimokhtari
more affected by environmental factors and by the 2013). The heritability of TLWW was higher than
genotypes of lambs than by the own genotypes of of the other traits, which may be due to genetic
dams. The selection of superior animals probably variation in this trait according to the increase
has led to a lower genetic variance of the desired in the weaning weight of lambs (Mokhtari et al.
trait (Falconer and Mackay 1996; Matika et al. 2003). 2010; Rashidi et al. 2011). The higher heritability

285
Original Paper Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

estimate for TLWW than for TLWB indicated that Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. (2013) and Moham-
selection based on TLWW would be more effective. madabadi and Sattayimokhtari (2013).
The low estimates of heritability for reproduc- Repeatability estimates were 0.40, 0.25, 0.19, 0.16,
tive traits in this study may be attributed to the 0.13 and 0.22 for LSB, LSW, LMWLB, LMWLW,
high phenotypic variance arising from a large TLWB, and TLWW, respectively. These estimates
environmental variation. This therefore implies are generally similar to the reports of Amou Posht-
that much of the improvement in reproductive e-Masari et al. (2013) and Mohammadabadi and
traits could be attained by the improvement of Sattayimokhtari (2013) in different sheep breeds.
production environment, such as nutrition of Repeatability estimates for LSB, LSW, LMWLB,
ewes before mating and after pregnancy, rather TLWB, and TLWW were higher than the heritabil-
than by the genetic selection. ity estimates. Therefore, the accuracy of selection
The ratio of permanent environmental variance for these traits using the first lambing record can
to phenotypic variance estimates for the inves- be high as repeatability evaluates the correlation
tigated traits ranged from 0.01 for LMWLW to between performance records in repeated lambing
0.23 for LSB. Estimates of the ratio of permanent of the ewe. Repeatability estimate for LMWLW
environmental variance to phenotypic variance was equal to heritability estimate, due to the low
were lower than the estimates of direct heritability ratio of permanent environmental variance to
for LSW, LMWLW, and TLWW traits, suggesting phenotypic variance. Therefore, we can say that the
that additive genetic effects on these traits are permanent effects of observations have a genetic
more significant. These results are consistent with aspect. Repeatability estimates varied from low to
reports of Rashidi et al. (2011) and Mohammadi et moderate; therefore obtaining more records may
al. (2012). On the other hand, estimated ratios of lead to achieving a higher accuracy, as the pre-
permanent environmental variance to phenotypic diction accuracy is a function of the repeatability
variance for LSB, LMWLB, and TLWB were greater estimate and the number of records.
than the estimated direct heritabilities for these Correlation estimates. Estimates of direct ge-
traits. This result is consistent with the reports of netic, phenotypic, permanent environmental, and

Table 5. Estimation of direct genetic, phenotypic, permanent environmental, and residual correlations between re-
productive traits

Correlation
Trait 1 Trait 2
direct genetic phenotypic permanent environmental residual
LSB LSW 0.90 ± 0.10 0.59 ± 0.01 0.67 ± 0.12 0.53 ± 0.01
LSB LMWLB –0.004 ± 0.58 –0.50 ± 0.01 –0.99 ± 0.11 –0.45 ± 0.02
LSB LMWLW –0.98 ± 0.12 0.09 ± 0.001 0.99 ± 0.06 0.39 ± 0.03
LSB TLWB 0.99 ± 0.41 0.05 ± 0.01 –0.54 ± 0.28 0.03 ± 0.01
LSB TLWW 0.11 ± 0.22 –0.04 ± 0.01 –0.63 ± 0.36 0.02 ± 0.01
LSW LMWLB –0.19 ± 0.76 –0.31 ± 0.01 –0.83 ± 0.19 –0.24 ± 0.02
LSW LMWLW –0.97 ± 0.31 –0.39 ± 0.01 –0.99 ± 0.16 –0.29 ± 0.02
LSW TLWB 0.90 ± 0.75 –0.06 ± 0.01 –0.59 ± 0.28 –0.07 ± 0.01
LSW TLWW 0.14 ± 0.18 0.06 ± 0.02 –0.67 ± 0.65 0.12 ± 0.02
LMWLB LMWLW 0.41 ± 0.51 0.07 ± 0.01 0.99 ± 0.13 0.02 ± 0.01
LMWLB TLWB nc nc nc nc
LMWLB TLWW 0.29 ± 0.48 0.03 ± 0.01 0.28 ± 0.39 –0.02 ± 0.01
LMWLW TLWB 0.26 ± 0.25 0.05 ± 0.01 0.69 ± 0.12 0.02 ± 0.01
LMWLW TLWW 0.86 ± 0.14 0.85 ± 0.004 0.99 ± 0.59 0.87 ± 0.005
TLWB TLWW 0.29 ± 0.29 0.02 ± 0.01 –0.02 ± 0.54 –0.01 ± 0.01

LSB = litter size at birth, LSW = litter size at weaning, LMWLB = litter mean weight per lamb born, LMWLW = litter mean
weight per lamb weaned, TLWB = total litter weight at birth, TLWW = total litter weight at weaning, nc = non-converged

286
Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288 Original Paper

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

residual correlations are shown in Table 5. Direct CONCLUSION

genetic correlation estimates between reproduc-
tive traits ranged from –0.98 for LSB–LMWLW Estimates of genetic parameters for reproductive
to 0.99 between LSB–TLWB. Direct genetic cor- traits are necessary for genetic evaluation and con-
relation of LSB with LSW (0.90) was positive structing the best selection programs in Mehraban
and high. Mokhtari et al. (2010) reported simi- sheep. Heritability estimates were low for almost all
lar results, but Hanford et al. (2006), Rashidi et traits in Mehraban sheep, and these estimates were
al. (2011), and Mohammadabadi and Sattay- in general consistent with the estimates of other
imokhtari (2013) reported low estimates for this researchers. Therefore, indirect selection could be
trait. Negative estimates of direct genetic correla- useful for improving these traits. The results sug-
tion of LSB with LMWLB (–0.004) and LMWLW gested that selection based on TLWW rather than
(–0.98), and LSW with LMWLB (–0.19) and LMWLW on the other traits could more effectively improve
(–0.97) were obtained in the current study. These the reproductive performance in Mehraban ewes,
estimates showed that a higher number of lambs due to greater heritability and positive genetic
in litter is dependent on lower birth weight and correlation with the other traits. There were sig-
weaning weight of lambs. In other words, geno- nificant permanent environmental effects related to
types producing low lamb numbers presumably repeated records of ewes. Therefore, improvement
produce heavier lambs at birth and weaning and of environmental conditions in the flocks such as
vice versa. Vatankhah and Talebi (2008), Mokhtari position, management, and nutrition can lead to
et al. (2010), and Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. (2013) the improvement of reproductive efficiency.
reported similar results. Direct genetic correlation
estimates between LSB and LSW with TLWB and REFERENCES
TLWW were positive. This result was expected
because the ewes with a higher number of lambs Amou Posht-e-Masari H., Shadparvar A.A., Ghavi Hossein-
born in each litter would have higher total weight Zadeh N., Hadi Tavatori M.H. (2013): Estimation of ge-
of lambs. This result is consistent with results re- netic parameters for reproductive traits in Shall sheep.
ported by Rashidi et al. (2011) in Moghani sheep Tropical Animal Health and Production, 45, 1259–1263.
(0.99) and Amou Posht-e-Masari et al. (2013) in Bromley C.M., Van Vleck L.D., Snowder G.D. (2001): Ge-
Shall sheep (0.98). netic correlations for litter weight weaned with growth,
Phenotypic and environmental correlations were prolificacy, and wool traits in Columbia, Polypay, Ram-
generally lower than genetic correlations. Phe- bouillet and Targhee sheep. Journal of Animal Science,
notypic correlations ranged from –0.50 for LSB– 79, 339–346.
LMWLB to 0.85 for LMWLW–TLWW. Permanent Ceyhan A., Sezenler T., Erdogan I. (2009): The estimation
environmental correlation between traits ranged of variance components for prolificacy and growth traits
from –0.99 for LSB–LMWLB and LSW–LMWLW of Sakiz sheep. Livestock Science, 122, 68–72.
to 0.99 for LSB–LMWLW, LMWLB–LMWLW, Cloete S.W.P., Gilmour A.R., Olivier J.J., van Wyk J.B. (2004):
and LMWLW–TLWW. Permanent environmental Genetic and phenotypic trends and parameters in repro-
correlation between LSW and other reproductive duction, greasy fleece weight and liveweight in Merino
traits except for LSB was negative and high. Perma- lines divergently selected for multiple rearing ability. Aus-
nent environmental correlation between LSB and tralian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 44, 745–754.
LMWLB was negative and high, which indicates Duguma G., Schoeman S.J., Cloete S.W.P., Jordaan G.F.
temporary undesirable environmental conditions (2002): Genetic and environmental parameters for pro-
due to the ewe uterine environment for multiple ductivity in Merinos. South African Journal of Animal
lambs leading to a reduction in lambs’ weight at Science, 32, 154–159.
birth (Mokhtari et al. 2010). Residual correla- Ekiz B., Ozcan M., Yilmaz A., Ceyhan A. (2005): Estimates
tions ranged from –0.45 for LSB–LMWLB to 0.87 of phenotypic and genetic parameters for ewe productiv-
for LMWLW–TLWW. Direct genetic and pheno- ity traits of Turkish Merino (Karacabey Merino) sheep.
typic correlation estimates between LMWLB and Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 29,
LMWLW were positive with other traits. Bivari- 557–564.
ate analysis of LMWLB–TLWB did not converge Ensminger M.E., Parker R.O. (1986): Sheep and Goat Science.
in this study. Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc., Danville, USA.

287
Original Paper Czech J. Anim. Sci., 60, 2015 (6): 281–288

doi: 10.17221/8242-CJAS

Falconer D.S., Mackay T.F.C. (1996): Introduction to Quan- Mokhtari M.S., Rashidi A., Esmailizadeh A.K. (2010): Es-
titative Genetics. Longman, Harlow, UK. timates of phenotypic and genetic parameters for re-
Fogarty N.M. (1995): Genetic parameters for live weight, fat productive traits in Kermani sheep. Small Ruminant
and muscle measurements, wool production and repro- Research, 88, 27–31.
duction in sheep: a review. Animal Breeding, 63, 101–143. Rashidi A., Mokhtari M.S., Esmailizadeh A.K., Asadi Fozi
Gallivan C. (1996): Breeding objectives and selection index M. (2011): Genetic analysis of ewe productivity traits in
for genetic improvement of Canadian sheep. Ph.D. Thesis. Moghani sheep. Small Ruminant Research, 96, 11–15.
Canada, Guelph: University of Guelph, 174 p. Rosati A., Mousa E., Van Vleck L.D., Young L.D. (2002):
Ghavi Hossein-Zadeh N., Ardalan M. (2010): Estimation of Genetic parameters of reproductive traits in sheep. Small
genetic parameters for body weight traits and litter size of Ruminant Research, 43, 65–74.
Moghani sheep, using Bayesian approach via Gibbs sam- Vanimisetti H.B., Notter D.R., Kuhen L.A. (2007): Genetic
pling. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 148, 363–370. (co)variance components for ewe productivity traits in
Hanford K.J., Van Vleck L.D., Snowder G.D. (2003): Es- Katahdin sheep. Journal of Animal Sciences, 85, 60–68.
timates of genetic parameters and genetic change for van Wyk J.B., Fair M.D., Cloete S.W.P. (2003): Revised mod-
reproduction, weight and wool characteristics of Targhee els and genetic parameter estimates for production and
sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 81, 630–640. reproduction traits in the Elsenburg Dormer sheep stud.
Hanford K.J., Van Vleck L.D., Snowder G.D. (2006): Esti- South African Journal of Animal Science, 33, 213–222.
mates of genetic parameters and genetic trend for repro- Vatankhah M., Talebi M.A. (2008): Heritability estimates
duction, weight and wool characteristics of Polypay sheep. and correlations between production and reproductive
Livestock Production Science, 102, 72–82. traits in Lori-Bakhtiari sheep in Iran. South African Jour-
Matika O., van Wyk J.B., Erasmus G.J., Baker R.L. (2003): nal of Animal Science, 38, 110–118.
Genetic parameter estimates in Sabi sheep. Livestock Vatankhah M., Moradi M., Nejati-Javaremi A., Mireaei-
Production Science, 79, 17–28. Ashtiani S.R., Vaez-Torshizi R. (2004): A review of sheep
Mohammadabadi M.R., Sattayimokhtari R. (2013): Esti- breeding in Iran. In: Proc. 1st Congress on Animal and
mation of (co)variance components of ewe productivity Aquatic Sciences, Tehran, Iran, 591–597.
traits in Kermani sheep. Slovak Journal of Animal Sci- Vatankhah M., Talebi M.A., Edriss M.A. (2008): Estimation
ences, 46, 45–51. of genetic parameters for reproductive traits in Lori-
Mohammadi H., Moradishahrebabak M., Moradishahre- Bakhtiari sheep. Small Ruminant Research, 74, 216–220.
babak H., Vatankhah M. (2012): Estimation of genetic
parameters of reproductive traits in Zandi sheep using Received: 2014–03–14
linear and threshold models. Czech Journal of Animal Accepted after corrections: 2014–11–15
Science, 57, 382–388.

Corresponding Author
Dr. Navid Ghavi Hossein-Zadeh, University of Guilan, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Science,
P.O. Box 41635-1314, Rasht, Iran
Phone: +98 13 336 902 74, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

288