Skip to main content

Incidence, Reproductive Outcome, and Economic Impact of Reciprocal Translocations in the Domestic Pig

Lewis, Nicole M., Rathje, Claudia Cattoni, Canedo-Ribeiro, Carla, Bosman, Lisa M., Kiazim, Lucas G., Jennings, Rebecca L., O’Connor, Rebecca E., Silvestri, Giuseppe, Griffin, Darren K. (2021) Incidence, Reproductive Outcome, and Economic Impact of Reciprocal Translocations in the Domestic Pig. DNA, 1 (2). pp. 68-76. ISSN 2673-8856. (doi:10.3390/dna1020007) (KAR id:90831)

PDF Publisher pdf
Language: English


Download (623kB) Preview
[thumbnail of dna-01-00007.pdf]
Preview
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format
Official URL
https://doi.org/10.3390/dna1020007

Abstract

Pigs (Sus scrofa) have vast economic importance, with pork accounting for over 30% of the global meat consumption. Chromosomal abnormalities, and in particular reciprocal translocations (RTs), are an important cause of hypoprolificacy (litter size reduction) in pigs. However, these do not necessarily present with a recognizable phenotype and may cause significant economic losses for breeders when undetected. Here, we present a reappraisal of the incidence of RTs across several European pig herds, using contemporary methodology, as well as an analysis modelling the economic impact of these abnormalities. Molecular cytogenetic investigation was completed by karyotyping and/or multiprobe FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridisation) between 2016–2021, testing 2673 animals. We identified 19 types of chromosome abnormalities, the prevalence of these errors in the database was 9.1%, and the estimated incidence of de novo errors was 0.90%. Financial modelling across different scenarios revealed the potential economic impact of an undetected RT, ranging from £69,802 for an individual affected terminal boar in a commercial farm selling weaned pigs, to £51,215,378 for a genetics company with an undetected RT in a dam line boar used in a nucleus farm. Moreover, the added benefits of screening by FISH instead of karyotyping were estimated, providing a strong case for proactive screening by this approach.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.3390/dna1020007
Uncontrolled keywords: chromosome; karyotype; FISH; subtelomere; artificial insemination (AI)
Subjects: Q Science > QH Natural history > QH301 Biology
Q Science > QH Natural history > QH426 Genetics
Divisions: Divisions > Division of Natural Sciences > Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies of Reproduction
Divisions > Division of Natural Sciences > Biosciences
Depositing User: Giuseppe Silvestri
Date Deposited: 13 Oct 2021 09:47 UTC
Last Modified: 14 Oct 2021 11:11 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/90831 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
O’Connor, Rebecca E.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4270-970X
Silvestri, Giuseppe: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5496-2470
Griffin, Darren K.: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7595-3226
  • Depositors only (login required):