Search

Abstract DNA fingerprints of Japanese quail male and female pure line breeders were obtained with probes 33.6, 33.15, and R18.1 and they yielded a total of 59 scoreable bands. Bandsharing (0 < BS < 1) was calculated within and between six quail lines of two origins, and under reciprocal recurrent (AA and BB), within-line (DD and EE) or no (PP and FF) selection. Twenty one pair types were compared. BS was 0.30 higher within line than between lines. BS with the control line was smaller for reciprocal recurrent selection lines than for lines under individual selection. Bandsharing between the two reciprocal recurrent selection lines was 0.19 lower than between lines under individual selection. These results indicate that the two selection methods had different effects on the genetic constitution of the lines, in agreement with previous observations made from the analysis of biochemical polymorphisms with the same set of birds. Egg production and weight traits of pure and crossbred progeny from fingerprinted quail were obtained and compared, and a linear relationship with the measure of bandsharing was estimated. No significant regression coefficient of performance on BS was found over all progeny genetic types. Heterosis from individual matings could also be estimated under the two selection methods since the same birds were parents of both pure and crossbred performance-tested quail. The association of heterosis with the difference between BS of parents of the purebreds and BS of parents of their half-sib crossbreds was favourable and significant for early production traits in lines DD and EE, but no relationship was found in lines AA and BB. These results indicate that the high level of heterosis obtained through reciprocal recurrent selection, and the heterosis observed under within-line selection may have, partly at least, a different genetic determinism. Therefore, the relationship of heterosis with BS may also depend on the past history of selection in the lines.

Copyright of International Journal of Legal Medicine is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)