Non-random mating for selection with restricted rates of inbreeding and overlapping generations

  • Anna K. SonessonEmail author
  • Theo H.E. Meuwissen
Open Access


Minimum coancestry mating with a maximum of one offspring per mating pair (MC1) is compared with random mating schemes for populations with overlapping generations. Optimum contribution selection is used, whereby ΔF is restricted. For schemes with ΔF restricted to 0.25% per year, 256 animals born per year and heritability of 0.25, genetic gain increased with 18% compared with random mating. The effect of MC1 on genetic gain decreased for larger schemes and schemes with a less stringent restriction on inbreeding. Breeding schemes hardly changed when omitting the iteration on the generation interval to find an optimum distribution of parents over age-classes, which saves computer time, but inbreeding and genetic merit fluctuated more before the schemes had reached a steady-state. When bulls were progeny tested, these progeny tested bulls were selected instead of the young bulls, which led to increased generation intervals, increased selection intensity of bulls and increased genetic gain (35% compared to a scheme without progeny testing for random mating). The effect of MC1 decreased for schemes with progeny testing. MC1 mating increased genetic gain from 11–18% for overlapping and 1–4% for discrete generations, when comparing schemes with similar genetic gain and size.


mating overlapping generations selection rate of inbreeding genetic response optimum contribution 

(To access the full article, please see PDF)

Copyright information

© INRA, EDP Sciences 2002

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Animal Science and Health (ID-Lelystad)LelystadThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations