Variation factors
According to the results of the variance analysis (Table 1), only the mode of birth was highly significant (p<0.001) for all the analyzed variables which are the weights at typical ages: birth weight (BW), weight at 10 days (W10), weight at 1 month (W30), weight at seventy days (W70) and weight at ninety days (W90). Our results supporting the effect of mode of birth on the different weights of lambs during the phase from birth to weaning (90 days) are similar to those found by
Gbangboche (2005) and
Mennani et al., (2011b) who reported that the mode of birth strongly influences the weights and thus the growth of lambs as well as the weaning rate with a superiority of single-born lambs.
On the other hand, the month of mating and the sex of the lamb were highly significant for only two variables which are: BW (birth weight) and W90 (weight at 90 days).
The results found in our study concerning the effect of month of mating and sex of lamb on the weights of lambs at different ages are identical to the results found by
Dekhili (2003);
Dekhili and Mahnane (2004);
Chikhi and Boujenane (2004);
Kerfal et al. (2005);
Gbangboche (2005), who found that sex had a very significant influence (P<0.0001) on the weights of lambs at different ages with a superiority of males compared to females for Algerian, Moroccan and West African sheep breeds.
The year and age of ewe were both non-significant (p>0.05) and were ignored from the model. The overall averages of lamb growth during the three years, although non-significant, are shown in Table 2 and Fig 1.
According to the results in Table 3, there is agreement between the variance analysis and the results obtained. We find that the month of mating, sex and mode of birth have the most important influence on the growth of lambs from birth to weaning. Indeed, the decomposition of the growth variance of lambs (Table 1) revealed that growth performances are dependent on environmental conditions. This result highlights the action of climatic and nutritional changes or the environment in general which are not controllable and in the same context,
Mallick et al. (2016), confirms in their study that seasons are considered as one of the main environmental factors affecting the growth performance of sheep, as weather conditions and feed availability vary considerably depending on the seasons. The second effect, which is the mode of birth, has two levels. Single-born lambs have superior growth performances compared to twin-born lambs from birth to weaning (Table 3). The growth obtained by the single birth group is higher than that of double births. Indeed, the results show that the mode of birth of lambs has a very important effect on weight at different ages. With a high weight at birth that is maintained up to 90 days. Probably due to the absence of competition from birth. For the other effects, sex and month of birth, we observe that there is a superiority of males over females, an advantage that is widely recognized, at birth and at 90 days. As for the month of birth effect, births in September are high at birth and at weaning (Table 3).
Results of the animal model
Using this model with a direct genetic effect, the heritability coefficients recorded in the present study are around 0.17±0.02 (BW), 0.07±0.01 (W10), 0.20±0.02 (W30), 0.20±0.02 (W70) and 0.10±0.02 (W90) (Table 4). For this “direct genetic effect” model, it should be noted that the maternal and environmental genetic effect is not taken into account. The heritability values observed in our study are relatively comparable to those obtained by
Mokhtari et al., (2010) in the literature, but for different breeds (sheep breeds raised in North Africa) and somewhat different environments. They found that heritability values for birth weight vary between 0.02 and 0.43; these birth weight heritability values concern eight sheep breeds raised in North Africa as well as those from the product obtained from the cross between the D’man breed and the Timahdite breed (
El Fadili et al., 2000). According to
Chalh et al., (2007), the Tunisian Black Thibar breed is characterized by heritability values for weight at 10 days of age and at 30 days higher than those found in our study; their values vary between 0.3±0.08 (W10), 0.23±0.08 (W30) and 0.28±0.09 (W70). This may be explained by the inclusion of the maternal genetic effect in the different models for estimating genetic parameters, which has a very important effect on the estimated value of direct heritability
(Mohammadi et al., 2010; Boujenane et al., 2015). In another study on the Egyptian Rahmani sheep breed,
(Radwan et al., 2018) used 6 different models and found values of the heritability coefficient that vary between 0.25 and 0.41 for birth weight.
According to the second model, the results in Table 5 shows that the values of the direct heritability coefficient (h²a) in this study are around 0.08±0.01 (BW), 0.03±0.01 (W10), 0.02±0.01 (W30), 0.01±0.01 (W70) and 0.01±0.01 (W90). Thus, the values of the maternal heritability coefficient (h²m) vary around 0.20±0.03 (BW), 0.11±0.03 (W10), 0.04±0.02 (W30), 0.04±0.02 (W70) and 0.07±0.02 (W90). The repeatability coefficient (r) values also vary from 0.2±0.02 (BW), 0.07±0.02 (W10), 0.04±0.01 (W30), 0.01±0.01 (W70) and 0.01±0.01 (W90). Regarding the genetic correlation between direct and maternal effects, the coefficient of this correlation r (a,m) was high and positive for all weights and varies between 0.54 and 0.99, except for W30 where it was negative (r = -0.87±0.06). From these results, it appears that the action of maternal effects on the growth of lambs before weaning, measured by h²m, is more important than that of direct effects h²a across all ages. Thus, the potential of the lamb is poorl expressed despite early supplementation. However, although the values of maternal heritability (h²m) appear to be higher than those of direct heritabilities (h²a), they never the less remain low in absolute terms (Table 5). Several authors have found values close to ours, citing the results found by
Boujenane et al., (2015), who found estimates of direct heritability of 0.05±0.02; 0.03±0.02 and 0.08±0.03 for BW, W30 and W90, respectively. Maternal effects significantly influenced growth performance; hence maternal heritability for BW, W30 and W90 was 0.10±0.02; 0.07±0.03 and 0.07±0.03, respectively. These differences in heritability values for the same trait are also bserved when several analys is models were used with or without the inclusion of the maternal effect and/or the permanent environmental effect due to the mother (
Boujenane and Diallo, 2016;
Mohammadi et al., 2010). These h²m values originate from high phenotypic variability (Ϭ²p), especially at the residual level (Ϭ²e). These results raise several questions regarding the model for studying performance in the highlands environment. Moreover, in their estimation of genetic parameters,
Boujenane et al., (2015) also take into account the temporary environmental influence related to the mother. Furthermore, it is the only study that has incorporated this constant factor in various valuation models. In the present case and with a capricious environment playing a very large role in the expression of genetic growth potentialities of lambs. It appears essential according to the results obtained to consider in the animal model all the genetic effects that can intervene in the determinism of the studied variables. To this is added the number of years to consider as well as the number of sites to test. The choice of the analysis model is decisive for a good estimation of genetic parameters because these are the most important source of information in animal selection. They allow estimating the expected genetic progress by using an appropriate selection method.