Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBett, R.C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorOkeyo Mwai, Allyen_US
dc.contributor.authorKosgey, I.S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKahi, A.K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPeters, Kurt J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-07-31T16:38:44Zen_US
dc.date.available2013-07-31T16:38:44Zen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/33421en_US
dc.titleEvaluation of alternative selection objectives and schemes for optimisation of village goat improvement programsen_US
dcterms.abstracthis study evaluated alternative breeding objectives and schemes for crossbred goats in a village/ community breeding program. A single-tier breeding structure was assumed in the optimisation of this breeding program. Considered were two selection schemes; within-group (WG) and across-groups (AG), and three alternative selection objectives; ALT I- defined based on relative weights (RWs) derived from producers’ preferences, ALT II- based on economic values (EVs) without risk and ALT III- based on risk-rated EVs, at different intensities of buck selection (proportion of bucks selected, P = 0.02 and 0.04) and selection criteria (mass and BLUP). The genetic gains (ΔG) in the breeding-objective traits, aggregate responses (RH), total economic response (TER) and the rate of inbreeding (ΔF) per generation varied depending on the scenarios ALT I, II and III, P and the selection criteria. A selection index considering ALT III (Risk-rated EVs) in derivation of ΔG for individual traits, RH and TER, and ΔF would be appropriate and optimal in both WG and AG selection schemes. However, these responses were higher in the AG scheme compared to the WG selection scheme, and the ΔF more favourable with increase in the number of groups co-operating. Responses under mass selection were also comparable to BLUP with the same rate of inbreeding, restricted to an acceptable level of 0.01. These imply that an AG selection scheme under mass selection would be optimal and logical for implementation in the smallholder low-input goat production systems. However, a minimum of 14 co-operating farmer groups would be required to produce considerable levels of responses and at acceptable levels of inbreeding.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsOpen Accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationBett, R.C., Okeyo, A.M., Kosgey, I.S., Kahi, A.K. and Peters, K.J. 2012. Evaluation of alternative selection objectives and schemes for optimisation of village goat improvement programs. Livestock Research for Rural Development 24(1).en_US
dcterms.issued2012en_US
dcterms.languageenen_US
dcterms.subjectgoatsen_US
dcterms.subjectanimal breedingen_US
dcterms.typeJournal Articleen_US
cg.subject.ilriANIMAL BREEDINGen_US
cg.subject.ilriBREEDSen_US
cg.subject.ilriGENETICSen_US
cg.subject.ilriGOATSen_US
cg.subject.ilriLIVESTOCKen_US
cg.subject.ilriSMALL RUMINANTSen_US
cg.identifier.urlhttp://www.lrrd.org/lrrd24/1/bett24014.htmen_US
cg.creator.identifierAlly Okeyo Mwai: 0000-0003-2379-7801en_US
cg.journalLivestock Research for Rural Developmenten_US
cg.volume24en_US
cg.issue1en_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record