Indian Journal of Animal Research

  • Chief EditorK.M.L. Pathak

  • Print ISSN 0367-6722

  • Online ISSN 0976-0555

  • NAAS Rating 6.50

  • SJR 0.263

  • Impact Factor 0.5 (2023)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Animal Research, volume 43 issue 1 (march 2009) : 53-55

GROWTH RATE OF MADRAS RED SHEEP IN FARMERS’ FLOCKS

P. Devendran, D. Cauveri, K. Gajendran*
1Department of Animal Genetics and Breeding, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal–637 002, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Devendran P., Cauveri D., Gajendran* K. (2024). GROWTH RATE OF MADRAS RED SHEEP IN FARMERS’ FLOCKS. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 43(1): 53-55. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The absolute growth rate (Average Daily Gain) of Madras Red sheep at different stages of growth
from birth to 12 months was analyzed and the influence of non-genetic factors on them was assessed.
The mean absolute growth rate for birth-3 months, 3-6, 6-9 and 9-12 months were 73.74 ± 0.14,
60.17 ± 0.27, 42.39 ± 0.20 and 23.81 ± 0.31 g respectively. The average pre-weaning growth rate
was high and reduced progressively at post-weaning. The lambs born in off-season grew faster than
main-season lambs and males grew faster than females at all stages of growth. The significant influence
of ram and ewe weight at lambing was also observed. The heritability estimates of
absolute growth rate computed by paternal half-sib analysis indicated the scope for improvement
through selection.

REFERENCES

  1. Acharya, R.M. (1982). Sheep and Goat Breeds of India. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 30, Food and
  2. Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. pp. viii+190.
  3. Carter, R.C. et al. (1971). J. Anim. Sci., 33:732-735.
  4. Ercanbrack, S.K. and Prince, D.A. (1972). J. Anim. Sci., 34:713-725.
  5. Ganesakale, D. and Rathnasabapathy, V. (1973). Cheiron, 2:146-155.
  6. Harvey, W.R. (1990). User’s guide for LSMLMW and MIXMDL PC-2 version, Mixed Model Least-Squares and Maximum
  7. Likelihood Computer Program. Ohio State University, Ohio, USA.
  8. Jagtap, D.Z. et al. (1989). Indian J. Anim. Sci., 59:1416-1420.
  9. Kalia, O.P. et al. (1989). Indian J. Anim. Sci., 59:877-880.
  10. Mandal, A. et al. (2003). Trop. Anim. Hlth and Prod., 35:271- 284.
  11. Mavrogenis, A.P. et al. (1980). Trop. Anim. Hlth and Prod., 30:271-276.
  12. Negi, P.R. et al. (1987). Indian J. Anim. Sci., 57:592-595.
  13. Poonia, J.S.B. et al. (1986). Indian J. Anim. Prod. and Mgmt., 22:119-121.
  14. Raman, K.S. et al. (2003). Indian J. Small Rumin., 9:6-9.
  15. Rastogi, R. et al. (1982). J. Anim. Sci., 54:27-30.
  16. Stobart, R.H. et al. (1986). J. Anim. Sci., 63:729-740
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)