English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Understanding the genetics underlying growth curve is important for selection of animals with better growth potential, but little is known about the genetics of growth curve parameters in mink. This study estimated the genetic parameters for body weights (BWs), harvest length (HL), and growth parameters derived from the Richards model. For this purpose, individual BW of 1,088 mink measured seven times in 3-wk intervals (weeks 13 to 31 of life) were used for growth curve modeling using the Richards model. The BW traits included BW at week 13 (BW13), 16 (BW16), 19 (BW19), 22 (BW22), 25 (BW25), 28 (BW28), and 31 (BW31). Univariate analyses indicated that sex and birth-year had significant effects (P &amp;lt; 0.05) on BW, HL, asymptotic weight (α), growth rate at mature (k), shape parameter (m), weight at the inflection point (WIP), and age at the inflection point (AIP). In contrast, the color type had only significant effect (P &amp;lt; 0.05) on BW31 and HL. Estimated heritabilities (±SE) were ranged from 0.36 ± 0.13 (BW13) to 0.46 ± 0.10 (BW22) for BW and were 0.51 ± 0.09, 0.29 ± 0.09, 0.30 ± 0.09, 0.33 ± 0.1, 0.44 ± 0.10, and 0.47 ± 0.10 for HL, α, k, m, WIP, and AIP, respectively. The parameter α had non-significant (P &amp;gt; 0.05) genetic correlations (±SE) with k (−0.21 ± 0.23) and m (−0.10 ± 0.22), suggesting that changing shape parameters (k and m) will not influence asymptotic weight (α). Strong significant (P &amp;lt; 0.05) phenotypic (from 0.46 ± 0.03 to 0.60 ± 0.03) and genetic (0.70±0.13 to 0.88±0.09) correlations were observed between HL and different BW measures. The α, AIP, and WIP parameters had significant (P &amp;lt; 0.05) genetic correlations with HL indicated that selection for higher α, AIP, and WIP values would increase HL. Parameters k and m had nonsignificant (P &amp;gt; 0.05) genetic correlations with HL, indicating the change of the curve shape could not influence HL. Overall, the results suggest that growth curve parameters are heritable and can respond to genetic or genomic selection for optimizing the performance in mink.

Genetic and phenotypic parameters for body weights, harvest length, and growth curve parameters in American mink