<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Original study}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AAB</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Archives Animal Breeding</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AAB</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Arch. Anim. Breed.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2363-9822</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/aab-66-245-2023</article-id><title-group><article-title>Inbreeding in the Zwartbles breed population and its influence on meat
production in the Czech Republic</article-title><alt-title>Inbreeding in Zwartbles breed population</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Inbreeding in Zwartbles breed population}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{R.~Filip\v{c}\'{\i}k et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Filipčík</surname><given-names>Radek</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name><surname>Falta</surname><given-names>Daniel</given-names></name>
          <email>daniel.falta@mendelu.cz</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Sokolová</surname><given-names>Dominika</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Hošek</surname><given-names>Martin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Pešan</surname><given-names>Vojtěch</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5811-4076</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
          <name><surname>Kopec</surname><given-names>Tomáš</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><institution>Department of Animal Breeding, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Daniel Falta (daniel.falta@mendelu.cz)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>13</day><month>September</month><year>2023</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>66</volume>
      <issue>3</issue>
      <fpage>245</fpage><lpage>252</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>17</day><month>April</month><year>2023</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>30</day><month>June</month><year>2023</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>11</day><month>August</month><year>2023</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2023 Radek Filipčík et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2023</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/66/245/2023/aab-66-245-2023.html">This article is available from https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/66/245/2023/aab-66-245-2023.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/66/245/2023/aab-66-245-2023.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/66/245/2023/aab-66-245-2023.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e123">The aim of this study was to estimate the inbreeding coefficient in the
Zwartbles sheep population in the Czech Republic, as well as to investigate
the effect of inbreeding on meat yield indicators. The analysis used data on
the entire population since 1997, with the original database containing 13 150 animals. In this population, the average inbreeding coefficient is 3.64 %. There is a significant increase in inbreeding – from zero values to
more than 4 % between 1997 and 2021. The effect of inbreeding on the
weight of the animals at 100 d of age, the weight at bonitation prior to
breeding, the thickness of the <italic>musculus longissimus dorsi</italic> (MLD), the thickness of the subcutaneous
back fat, and the fleshiness of the animals were all evaluated. The value of
the inbreeding coefficient had a statistically significant effect on weight
at 100 d, MLD thickness, and back fat thickness. A negative relationship
between inbreeding and all of these parameters was found when the inbreeding
coefficient was increased by 1 %, resulting in a 60.2 g weight reduction
at 100 d, 0.06 mm reduction in MLD thickness, and 0.013 mm reduction in
back fat thickness.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e138">Meat sheep breeding is currently the most important sector of sheep breeding
in the Czech Republic. Sheep of the Zwartbles breed are kept in small herds
and are a less numerous but dynamically developing breed in the Czech
Republic. Research on meat productivity in the Zwartbles breed in the Czech
Republic has already been carried out by Komprda et al. (2012), who evaluated slaughter parameters and meat quality in
the Zwartbles, Suffolk, and Oxford Down breeds.</p>
      <p id="d1e141">A variety of factors influence meat yield, including animal individuality,
housing, nutrition, and breed affiliation. These aspects have been
discussed, for example, by McGovern et al. (2020) and Fetherstone
et al. (2022). The influence of the management of reproduction,
gender, and litter frequency on meat yield is also assessed
(Ilic et al., 2013). The genetic foundation of meat yield and
external influences on meat were evaluated, for example, in the D'man sheep
breed (Boujenane et al., 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e144">The value of the inbreeding coefficient is another important factor
influencing sheep meat productivity. It has negative effects on both milk
yield (Cesarani et al., 2023) and meat yield (Kiya
et al., 2019). Inbreeding has also been shown to have a negative effect on
milk yield in goats, with a 1 % increase in the inbreeding coefficient
resulting in a 2.31 kg decrease in milk yield per lactation (Paiva
et al., 2020). In Denmark, the effect of inbreeding on meat yield was
analyzed in three main meat sheep breeds (Norberg and Sorensen,
2007). The mentioned works describe the negative influence of inbreeding on
the main parameters of sheep meat yield, particularly on the development of
the <italic>longissimus dorsi</italic> muscle, the thickness of back fat, birth weight, and average daily gain
in lambs. The inbreeding coefficient has a significant effect on sheep
reproductive indicators. Inbreeding, for example, has been shown to reduce
fertility, fecundity, and prolificacy in Leccese sheep in Italy
(Selvaggi et al., 2010).</p>
      <p id="d1e150">The structure of sheep populations and the estimation of the inbreeding
coefficient in these populations have been discussed by many authors
(Eteqadi et al., 2014; Kiya et al., 2019; Norberg and Sorensen, 2007).
Its ever-increasing value, combined with a negative effect on a number of
important production and reproductive traits, may cause issues in the
future, similar to what we see in important dairy<?pagebreak page246?> cattle breeds
(da Silva et al., 2019). Between 2007 and 2011, only
animals with an inbreeding coefficient of up to 5 % were found in the
Dorper sheep population in Brazil. Following that, there is already an
increase in animals with higher inbreeding. Over six generations, the
average value of the inbreeding coefficient increased from nearly zero
values to 1.65 % (Kiya et al., 2019). In Denmark, significant
populations of meat sheep breeds have seen an increase in the inbreeding
coefficient (Norberg and Sorensen, 2007). Population structure, size
of inbreeding, and effective population size are also addressed in goats. The
Saanen goat in Brazil has an average inbreeding coefficient of 1.48 % and
is constantly increasing (Paiva et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e154">With the recent development of modern breeding tools, it is now possible to
assess the degree of inbreeding in sheep populations using data from animal
genomic selection. In Switzerland, genomic data were used to assess
inbreeding in sheep (Signer-Hasler et al., 2019). This can reveal
differences in the inbreeding coefficient between full siblings and where
they have an effect in the genome. This opens up new avenues for increasing
genetic diversity within the breed. Information about genomic inbreeding can
help us better understand population kinship relationships and make better
decisions when organizing animal breeding. The use of genomic and animal
pedigree information to improve inbreeding management in sheep and goat
populations in Italy has demonstrated additional undeniable benefits of
involving genomics in this issue (Cortellari et al., 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e157">The aim of the study was to determine the level of kinship in the Zwartbles
breed population in the Czech Republic and to further assess the effect of
this kinship on meat yield parameters. The inbreeding coefficient expresses
kinship, and the null hypothesis states that it has no effect on meat
production indicators.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Material and methods</title>
      <p id="d1e168">The evaluation included all Zwartbles sheep in the Czech Republic that are
involved in official animal recording of sheep. A total of 13 150 individuals of the
Zwartbles breed born between 1997 and 2021 were evaluated in the pedigree.
The inbreeding coefficient was calculated using all individuals. The current
average size of the Zwartbles population involved in performance control is
around 750 mature sheep. Because the breed is bred primarily for meat yield,
the effects of the inbreeding coefficient on meat yield parameters were
investigated. The influence on weight at 100 d of age (Weight100) as well
as weight at bonitation before selection for breeding (Weight300), the
thickness of <italic>musculus longissimus</italic> <italic>dorsi</italic> (MLD) in millimeters at 100 d, the thickness of back fat in millimeters
(BackFat) at 100 d, and the fleshiness at 100 d were all evaluated
(subjective point evaluation on a scale of 1–5). Body weight was measured
using an individual digital weight scale for sheep (Superdamp™
technology, ISO 9001). These data are routinely collected during sheep
performance recording in the Czech Republic. The apparatus method is used to
determine BackFat thickness and MLD behind the last thoracic vertebra using
the DP-20 VET (at the age of 100 d as part of official animal recording
of sheep). Weight100 was recorded in 11 534 sheep, Weight300 in 2813 sheep,
MLD thickness in 11 533 sheep, back fat thickness in 1731 sheep, and
fleshiness in 1715 sheep. Weight100, MLD fatness, and BackFat were measured
in animals aged 70–130 d and Weight300 at around 300 d (214–378 d).</p>
      <p id="d1e177">The average farm size in the largest set for Weight100 was 16 animals, and
animals from 78 farms were included in the calculation. Twins were the most
common in the litter (63.01 %), with singletons accounting for 19.09 %
of the total. Females constituted 53.29 % of the population.</p>
      <p id="d1e180">Grazing production systems based on the efficient and sustainable use of
permanent grasslands, with minimization of labor intensity and external
inputs into the system, predominate in the Czech Republic. During the
natural breeding season (August to November), breeding is mostly done in a
harem style. Only rams who have undergone bonitation can be used for
breeding. During the winter, the animals are kept in sheepfolds, and on some
farms, lamb feeding is organized.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SSx1" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Statistical analysis</title>
      <p id="d1e188">The PROC INBREED procedure in SAS 9.1 software (SAS Institute, 2004) was used to calculate
inbreeding coefficients. The effect of the level of the inbreeding
coefficient on meat yield parameters was estimated using the GLM (general linear model) method
using PROC GLM in SAS 9.1. software. In addition to the influence of
inbreeding, the model included the following explanatory variables:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.Ex1"><mml:math id="M1" display="block"><mml:mtable class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mtext>age</mml:mtext><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mtext>age2</mml:mtext><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>sex</mml:mtext><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>freq</mml:mtext><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>breeder</mml:mtext><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>month</mml:mtext><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mtext>year</mml:mtext><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the dependent variable (the selected indicator of meat
yield); age and age2 denote the quadratic regression of age on meat yield indicators
(age is the age of animals in days related to the day of measurement, and age2 is the age
squared) with the corresponding regression coefficients, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the regression of the inbreeding coefficient on meat yield with
the corresponding regression coefficient, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; sex<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th gender
effect (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2, 1: male, 2: female); freq<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th effect of the
number of individuals at birth (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4, 1: singleton, 2: twins, 3: three
lambs, 4: four lambs); breeder<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th effect of the breeder (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 78);
month<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th effect of the month of birth (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1–12,
January–December);  year<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th effect of year of birth (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 25,
1997–2021); and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the random residual error. The model included age at
100 d for Weight100, MLD, fleshiness, and BackFat, ranging from 70–130 d. The animals' ages ranged from 131 to 700 d when evaluating the
effect on Weight300 and fleshiness.</p>
      <?pagebreak page247?><p id="d1e556">The level of significance for accepting the alternative hypothesis about the
influence of the inbreeding coefficient on meat yield parameters, as well as
for including the effects in the model equation, was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Based
on histogram analysis, the evaluated meat yield parameters had an
approximately normal frequency distribution. The chosen model's suitability
was evaluated using Q–Q plots of residual errors, a plot of standardized
residuals and fitted values, and a diagnostic diagram of Cook's distance.
The coefficient of determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 0.21 for fleshiness to
0.45 for weight at bonitation.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
      <p id="d1e591">The Zwartbles breed has been bred in the Czech Republic since 1995 when
animals were imported for breeding for the first time, and subsequent years saw
further imports from various countries and breeders. As a result, only a
minor amount of inbreeding is observed in the early years of Zwartbles
breeding in the Czech Republic.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e597">Descriptive statistic for the coefficient of inbreeding (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) for the basic dataset.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Minimum</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Maximum</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">SEM</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">13 150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">42.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.0406</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e607">SEM: standard error of the mean.</p></table-wrap-foot><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{1}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e673">In the entire Zwartbles population, the average inbreeding coefficient
(Table 1) is 3.64 %, with a maximum value of 42.37 %. The observed set
of sheep contained 13 150 individuals, which were included in the original
set for calculating the amount of inbreeding.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e680">Frequency of animals in each group of inbreeding coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> class</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Percent</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0 %–5 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">72.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.1 %–10 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10.1 %–25 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> 25.1 %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{2}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e810">The Zwartbles population was divided into four groups based on the level of
inbreeding coefficient (Table 2): 0 %–5 %, 5.1 %–10 %, 10.1 %–25 %, and
more than 25 %. A total of 72.86 % of animals belonged to the lowest group, while
1.16 % belonged to the highest group.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e816">Frequency of animals in each group of inbreeding coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) according to birth year.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Birth year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> class </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1997</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1998</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1999</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2000</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">119</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2001</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">163</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2002</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">189</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2003</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">382</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2004</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">445</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2005</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">552</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2006</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">547</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2007</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">554</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2008</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">449</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2009</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">432</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">58</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">335</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">404</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">144</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2012</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">497</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2013</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">493</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">162</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">438</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">161</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">471</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">162</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2016</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">626</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">188</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">23</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">586</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">238</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">15</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2018</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">554</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">267</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">13</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">432</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">290</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">389</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">189</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2021</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">307</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">148</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{3}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1321">In terms of population development based on individual years of birth (Table 3), there is a steady increase in the rate of kinship. There were only
animals in the lowest category of the inbreeding coefficient (0 %–5 %) in
the population until the year of birth in 2000, when due to the spread of
the breed in Czech farms, animals with a higher proportion of inbreeding
began to increase. Since 2015, there have been more than 10 individuals in
the set with an inbreeding coefficient greater than 25 %. Figure 1 shows
that as the year of birth increases, there is a noticeable increase in
inbreeding in this population. According to this, the greatest increase
occurred in the second category of the inbreeding coefficient (5.1 %–10 %),
which has included roughly 30 % of all animals in the population in recent
years. However, more than half of all animals have an inbreeding coefficient
of up to 5 %, and only a small percentage have an inbreeding coefficient
of more than 25 %.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1326">Percentual frequencies of animals in each inbreeding coefficient group according to the birth year. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> classes: 1 (0 %–5 %), 2 (5.1 %–10 %), 3 (10.1 %–25 %), and 4 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> 25 %).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/66/245/2023/aab-66-245-2023-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1350">Figure 2 depicts the development of the inbreeding coefficient in the
population by year of birth. A linear function with an average annual
increase of 0.2 percentage points can explain 93 % of this trend. In the final
years of birth, the inbreeding coefficient increased from nearly zero to
more than 5 %.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1355">Trend of average coefficient of inbreeding (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the Zwartbles population.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/66/245/2023/aab-66-245-2023-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1371">The influence of the inbreeding coefficient on meat yield parameters was
analyzed. The impact on the following meat productivity indicators was
assessed: weight at 100 d (Weight100) in kilograms, weight at bonitation
(Weight300) in kilograms, <italic>longissimus</italic> <italic>dorsi</italic> muscle thickness (MLD) in millimeters, back fat thickness
(BackFat) in millimeters, and fleshiness (Fleshiness) in points according to EUROP.
The average age at Weight100 was 101.36 d. The average age of animals at
bonitation (Weight300) was 288.19 d. Table 4 shows the average parameters
of meat productivity according to the level of the inbreeding coefficient.
In the case of animal weight at 100 d, there is a clear decrease in live
weight with increasing inbreeding coefficient class. Individuals with an
inbreeding coefficient greater than 25 % have a live weight that is more
than 2 kg lower than the other groups. This trend, however, is no longer
visible in the weight of animals at bonitation (Weight300), where the lowest
weight is found in animals with the lowest inbreeding coefficient of up to 5 %. Lower values for MLD thickness can be observed in animals with an
inbreeding coefficient greater than 10.1 % compared to animals with an
inbreeding coefficient of less than 10 %. The same is true for back fat,
where the first two inbreeding classes outperform the classes with a higher
inbreeding<?pagebreak page249?> coefficient. This also holds true for fleshiness, which reaches a
value of 0.46 for the lowest inbreeding coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) class and 0.56 for
the second <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> class, while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> class 3 reaches a value of 0.26, and class 4
reaches a higher value of 0.36.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1404">Mean meat parameters according to inbreeding coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) classes.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.96}[.96]?><oasis:tgroup cols="11">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> class</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Weight100 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11 534) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">Weight300 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2813) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center" colsep="1">MLD (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11 533) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col8" nameend="col9" align="center" colsep="1">BackFat (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1731) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col10" nameend="col11" align="center">Fleshiness (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1715) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">SEM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">SEM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">SEM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">SEM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">SEM</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1 (0 %–5 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30.01<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0820</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">52.72<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1929</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">23.93<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.1139</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.86<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.0240</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.61<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.0273</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2 (5.1 %–10 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30.00<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.1560</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">53.91<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.3401</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">23.91<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.5883</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.89<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.0368</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.49<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.0462</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3 (10.1 %–25 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">29.77<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.2669</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">53.56<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.5654</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">22.26<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.4590</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.66<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.0776</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.91<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.1051</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> 25 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">27.50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.5728</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">54.95<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.1936</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">22.81<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.9627</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.31<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.1505</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.38<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">0.2562</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.96}[.96]?><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e1414"><?xmltex \hack{\vspace{2mm}}?>SEM: standard error of the mean. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Different superscripts indicate statistically significant differences between means within each factor (rejecting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></table-wrap-foot><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{4}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1973">The inbreeding coefficient (Table 5) had a statistically significant
influence on weight at 100 d (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0007</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), as well as the MLD area
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0303</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and back fat (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0293</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The effect is highly statistically
significant for weight at 100 d but not so much for MLD area and back
fat, where the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value ranges from 0.01 to 0.05.</p>
      <p id="d1e2020">The null hypothesis could not be rejected in the case of weight at
bonitation and fleshiness because the inbreeding coefficients have no
discernible effect on these parameters. In the case of weight during
bonitation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4587</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and in the case of fleshiness, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.0958.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2052">Regression of the inbreeding coefficients (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) on meat parameters.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Trait</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Weight100</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0602</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0007</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.2867</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Weight300</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0334</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.4587</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.4496</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MLD</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0632</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0303</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.3707</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">BackFat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0132</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0293</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.2936</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Fleshiness</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0127</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0958</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.2143</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e2062"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>: regression coefficients of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> on meat traits. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value: significance of regression coefficient in the GLM. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>: coefficient of determination of the GLM.</p></table-wrap-foot><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{5}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2250">The regression coefficient for weight at 100 d reaches <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.0602, implying
that a 1 % increase in the inbreeding coefficient results in a 60.2 g
drop in live weight at 100 d. When the inbreeding coefficient increases
by 1 %, the MLD thickness decreases by 0.06 mm on average, and the back
fat decreases by 0.013 mm. The weight during bonitation is not significantly
affected by the degree of inbreeding, and the same applies to fleshiness; the
regression coefficients can be considered zero. However, in the case of
fleshiness, where the null hypothesis was rejected at the level of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0958</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, a negative trend is also visible in relation to the level of the
inbreeding coefficient.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e2280">The overall value of the inbreeding coefficient in sheep populations varies
greatly across countries. For example, the average inbreeding coefficient in
the Dorper sheep breed in Brazil is 0.32 % (Kiya et al., 2019).
In contrast, for the Morada Nova breed, the authors report an average value
of 2.88 % (Matos and Lôbo, 2021). Another study on two breeds
in Italy found a large variation in the inbreeding coefficient in different
sheep populations, with one breed having an inbreeding value of 5.3 % and
the other having an inbreeding value of 15.3 % (Cesarani
et al., 2023). An inbreeding analysis of three meat breeds in Denmark showed
variability in the inbreeding coefficient ranging from 1.2 % to 2.6 %, with
an intergenerational increase in inbreeding of around 1 %
(Norberg and Sorensen, 2007). The different values of the inbreeding
coefficient in different populations can be attributed to reproduction
management, i.e., the different intensity and time of use of the stud in
breeding. The average value of the inbreeding coefficient in our study is
3.64%, which is within the range of average values compared to other
populations. Although this coefficient is much higher than for extensively
bred breeds (Kiya et al., 2019), it also reaches much lower values
than for intensively bred breeds (Cesarani et al., 2023). It
is true that the above-mentioned values of the inbreeding coefficient result
in great variability between populations, which is also due to different
mating management and different ways of using studs in herds. From this
point of view, the level of inbreeding in the Zwartbles population in the
Czech Republic can be assessed as satisfactory. Also, the annual average
increase in the inbreeding coefficient is not as significant as stated, for
example, by Norberg and Sorensen (2007).</p>
      <p id="d1e2283">In terms of the structure of the inbreeding coefficient in the Lecesse sheep
population in Italy, 11.86 % of the animals had an inbreeding coefficient
greater than 10 %, 49.15 % had an inbreeding value of 0 %–10 %, and
38.98 % were non-inbred (Selvaggi et al., 2010). The
Dorper breed also has the highest number of animals in the 0 %–5 %
inbreeding category and the lowest number of animals in the 25 %
inbreeding category. This is consistent with the findings in Table 3 and
Fig. 1. From a comparison with other authors, the results of Zwartbles in
the Czech Republic can be evaluated positively, which also corresponds to
the average inbreeding coefficients. Compared to the Lecesse sheep
population (Selvaggi et al., 2010), there are many more
animals in the 0 %–5% inbreeding category in our population. This may be
related to the fact that the Zwartbles breed has only been bred in the Czech
Republic since 1997, and the population was based on unrelated animals.</p>
      <p id="d1e2286">The value of the inbreeding coefficient is also increasing in the Florina
sheep population. Its value increased linearly between 1997 and 2017 but
then increased even more as a result of scrapie resistance breeding
(Tsiokos and Ligda, 2021). A very similar trend of increasing
inbreeding coefficients, as shown in Fig. 2, is reported by the authors in
a study of kinship in the Marwari breed, where inbreeding increased from
zero to more than 2.5 % between 1975 and 2020 (Vyas et al.,
2022). The increase in the coefficient is observed similarly in our work,
where it shows a linear trend and confirms the increasing coefficient of
inbreeding in the population, which is also a noticeable trend in many other
pieces of research on various animal species, such as cattle
(da Silva et al., 2019) or goats (Paiva et al.,
2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e2289">The influence of the inbreeding coefficient on meat productivity indicators
is described not only in sheep but also in pigs (Vígh et al.,
2008) or beef cattle (Lozada-Soto et al., 2021). There was a
statistically significant effect of the inbreeding coefficient on the
development of MLD and the thickness of back fat in the work dealing with
the effect of inbreeding on meat yield in the Dorper sheep breed, which
corresponds to our results. Conversely, the authors report an
inconclusive effect of inbreeding in the Dorper breed for weight in 90 and
100 d, which contradicts our findings. A study in Moghani
sheep shows a negative relationship between inbreeding and weight at 90 d, where a 1 % increase in inbreeding resulted in a 7 g reduction in
live weight (Dorostkar et al., 2012). A negative effect of
inbreeding is also observed for the weight at 90 d in the Guilan sheep
breed, with the regression coefficient reaching a value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>28.406 g
(Eteqadi et al., 2014).</p>
      <?pagebreak page250?><p id="d1e2300">A study of three meat sheep breeds, namely the Texel, Shropshire, and Oxford
Down breeds, revealed inbreeding depression in an average daily gain of up
to 2 months (Norberg and Sorensen, 2007). According to our findings,
the inbreeding effect was evident for the weight at 100 d but not for
the weight at bonitation. The fact that the growth of the lamb is also
influenced by the maternal component in the case of weight at 100 d can
also play a role here, where the inbreeding coefficient can also be applied
negatively for the mother. A study of the Suffolk breed in Great Britain
looks at the relationship between direct and maternal components in lamb
growth (Maniatis and Pollott, 2002).</p>
      <p id="d1e2303">The effect of inbreeding on slaughter parameters, particularly MLD thickness
and back fat, is not well described in the literature. A negative influence
of the inbreeding coefficient on carcass weight has been described for meat
breeds of cattle, for which an increase in the inbreeding coefficient by 1 % results in a decrease in carcass weight from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.87  to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.90 kg
(Mc Parland et al., 2008). The authors of this study also state
that in some meat breeds of cattle, poor musculature and development of
individual muscle parts were observed in live animals.</p>
      <p id="d1e2320">Genetic parameters were estimated for Brahman cattle, and the effect of
inbreeding on various useful properties was also considered. Among other
things, back fat thickness, rib eye area, and rump fat thickness were
evaluated. The authors find no evidence that inbreeding has a negative
effect on these parameters (Bessa et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e2323"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>The influence of the inbreeding coefficient on the MLD area was demonstrated
in Dorper sheep, where a 1 % increase in inbreeding resulted in a 0.0198 cm<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> increase in MLD area (Kiya et al., 2019), which is in
contrast to our results, where there was a statistically significant
reduction in MLD height. Our findings indicate that the inbreeding
coefficient may have a negative effect on slaughter parameters, specifically
the thickness of MLD and back fat; therefore, studies should focus on these
qualitative meat yield parameters, as they are important and useful. These
parameters were evaluated in Zwartbles sheep in the Czech Republic
(Komprda et al., 2012). The significance of these qualitative
parameters is described in a study on a nucleus herd of meat sheep in Norway
that dealt with meat performance parameter selection (Kvame and
Vangen, 2007). The influence of the inbreeding coefficient on meat yield
parameters generally corresponds to the results of other authors. Our
results show a nonsignificant effect on fleshiness, but the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value is only
0.09, so a certain negative relationship between fleshiness and inbreeding
can be observed here as well. There was also a nonsignificant effect on weight
at bonitation (Weight300), where the animal's growth has been influenced by
external factors for a long time.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e2352">The most important production characteristic of Zwartbles sheep is meat
yield. If the current trend of increasing inbreeding continues, there is a
risk of decreased productivity in the future. Because inbreeding is
constantly increasing, it is necessary to eliminate the reproduction of
individuals in group 4 in order to prevent genetic defects and a decrease in
productivity. Such animals should be removed from breeding, or their
offspring should not be allowed to reproduce. Simultaneously, blood exchange
and inbreeding reduction using newly imported studs are appropriate in the
near future. Another option for reducing inbreeding would be to also determine
parentage in ewe lambs as part of a more accurate pedigree control.</p>
      <p id="d1e2355">The research has also shown that if the inbreeding values increase, there is
a reduction in MLD and back fat. Inbreeding also has a negative impact on
weight at 100 d. However, because an individual's body weight at
bonitation is<?pagebreak page251?> influenced by more external factors, the influence of
inbreeding on weight at 300 d is inconclusive.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e2362">Data are available from the corresponding
author upon request.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e2368">Conceptualization and supervision: RF and TK.
Co-supervision: DF and RF. Data curation: TK, DF, and DS. Writing of the original
draft: RF, TK, MH, and DF. Formal analysis: MH and VP. Investigation:
DF and VP. Editing of the manuscript: RF and VP. Collection of data: DS, VP,
and MH.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e2374">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="specialsection"><title>Ethical statement</title>
    

      <p id="d1e2382">The study was conducted according to
the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Experimental procedures and
animal care conditions followed the recommendation of European Union
Directive 86/609/EEC and were approved by the Expert committee for ensuring the
welfare of experimental animals of Mendel University in Brno. Ethics
committee name: the Ethics review board (Ethics Committee of the expert
commission for ensuring the welfare of experimental animals) of Mendel
University in Brno. Approval code: 16OZ27083/2014-17214. Approval date: 20
May 2019.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e2388">Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e2394">This paper was edited by Steffen Maak and reviewed by three anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bessa, A. F. D., Duarte, I. N. H., Rola, L. D., Bernardes, P. A., Neto, S.
G., Lobo, R. B., Munari, D. P., and Buzanskas, M. E.: Genetic evaluation for
reproductive and productive traits in Brahman cattle, Theriogenology, 173,
261–268, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2021.08.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.theriogenology.2021.08.008</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boujenane, I., Chikhi, A., Ibnelbachyr, M., and Mouh, F. Z.: Estimation of
genetic parameters and maternal effects for body weight at different ages in
D'man sheep, Small Ruminant Res., 130, 27–35,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.07.025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.07.025</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cesarani, A., Mastrangelo, S., Congiu, M., Portolano, B., Gaspa, G., Tolone,
M., and Macciotta, N. P. P.: Relationship between inbreeding and milk
production traits in two Italian dairy sheep breeds, J. Anim. Breed. Genet.,
140, 28–38, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jbg.12741" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/jbg.12741</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cortellari, M., Negro, A., Bionda, A., Grande, S., Cesarani, A., Carta, A.,
Macciotta, N., Biffani, S., and Crepaldi, P.: Using Pedigree and Genomic
Data toward Better Management of Inbreeding in Italian Dairy Sheep and Goat
Breeds, Animals, 12, 2828, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12202828" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/ani12202828</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>da Silva, M., Malhado, C. H. M., Kern, E. L., Daltro, D. D., Cobuci, J. A.,
and Carneiro, P. L. S.: Inbreeding depression in Holstein cattle in Brazil,
Rev. Bras. Zootecn., 48, e20170212, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1590/rbz4820170212" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1590/rbz4820170212</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dorostkar, M., Arough, H. F., Shodja, J., Rafat, S. A., Rokouei, M., and
Esfandyari, H.: Inbreeding and Inbreeding Depression in Iranian Moghani
Sheep Breed, J. Agr. Sci. Technol., 14, 549–556, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Eteqadi, B., Hossein-Zadeh, N. G., and Shadparvar, A. A.: Population
structure and inbreeding effects on body weight traits of Guilan sheep in
Iran, Small Ruminant Res., 119, 45–51, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.03.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.03.003</ext-link>,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fetherstone, N., McGovern, F. M., Boland, T. M., and McHugh, N.: How does
maternal genetic merit and country of origin impact lamb performance pre-
and post-weaning?, Small Ruminant Res., 209, 106642,
do:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2022.106642, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ilic, Z., Jevtic-Vukmirovic, A., Petrovic, M. P., Caro-Petrovic, V.,
Milosevic, B., Spasic, Z., and Ristanovic, B.: Effect of mating method, sex
and birth type on growth of lambs, Biotechnol. Anim. Husbandry, 29, 277–286,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2298/bah1302277i" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2298/bah1302277i</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kiya, C. K., Pedrosa, V. B., Muniz, K. F. A., Gusmão, A. L., and
Batista, L. F. P.: Population structure of a nucleus herd of Dorper sheep
and inbreeding effects on growth, carcass, and reproductive traits, Small
Ruminant Res., 177, 141–145, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2019.06.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2019.06.015</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Komprda, T., Kuchtik, J., Jarosova, A., Drackova, E., Zemanek, L., and
Filipcik, B.: Meat quality characteristics of lambs of three organically
raised breeds, Meat Sci., 91, 499–505, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.03.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.03.004</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kvame, T. and Vangen, O.: Selection for lean weight based on ultrasound and
CT in a meat line of sheep, Livest. Sci., 106, 232–242,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.08.007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.livsci.2006.08.007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lozada-Soto, E. A., Maltecca, C., Lu, D., Miller, S., Cole, J. B., and
Tiezzi, F.: Trends in genetic diversity and the effect of inbreeding in
American Angus cattle under genomic selection, Genet. Sel. Evol., 53, 1–15,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-021-00644-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s12711-021-00644-z</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Maniatis, N. and Pollott, G. E.: Maternal effects on weight and
ultrasonically measured traits of lambs in a small closed Suffolk flock,
Small Ruminant Res., 45, 235–246, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-4488(02)00114-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/s0921-4488(02)00114-1</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Matos, É. J. A. and Lôbo, R. N. B.: Population structure and
inbreeding effects on growth traits of Morada Nova sheep, Livest. Sci., 251, 104625,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104625" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104625</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mc Parland, S., Kearney, J. F., MacHugh, D. E., and Berry, D. P.: Inbreeding
effects on postweaning production traits, conformation, and calving
performance in Irish beef cattle, J. Anim. Sci., 86, 3338–3347,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0751" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2527/jas.2007-0751</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McGovern, F. M., McHugh, N., Fitzmaurice, S., Pabiou, T., McDermott, K.,
Wall, E., and Fetherstone, N.: Phenotypic factors associated with lamb live
weight and carcass compositio<?pagebreak page252?>n measurements in an Irish multi-breed sheep
population, Translat. Anim. Sci., 4, 1–9, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa206" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/tas/txaa206</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Norberg, E. and Sorensen, A. C.: Inbreeding trend and inbreeding depression
in the Danish populations of Texel, Shropshire, and Oxford Down, J. Anim. Sci.,
85, 299–304, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-257" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2527/jas.2006-257</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Paiva, R. D. M., de Sousa, J. E. R., Ferreira, J., Cunha, E. E., de Paiva,
M. P. S. L. M., Gouveia, A. M. G., and Facó, O.: Population structure
and effect of inbreeding on milk yield of Saanen goats in Brazilian
production systems, Small Ruminant Res., 192,  106194,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2020.106194" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2020.106194</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
SAS Institute: SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide; SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Selvaggi, M., Dario, C., Peretti, V., Ciotola, F., Carnicella, D., and
Dario, M.: Inbreeding depression in Leccese sheep, Small Ruminant Res., 89,
42–46, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.12.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.12.005</ext-link>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Signer-Hasler, H., Burren, A., Ammann, P., Drogemuller, C., and Flury, C.:
Extent of genomic inbreeding in Swiss sheep and goat breeds, Agrarforsch.
Schweiz., 10, 372–379, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tsiokos, D. and Ligda, C.: Monitoring inbreeding and selection on scrapie
resistance in a closed nucleus of Florina sheep breed, Small Ruminant Res.,
201, 106422, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106422" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106422</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Vígh, Z., Gyovai, P., Csató, L., Bokor, Á., Farkas, J., Radnóczi, L., Komlósi, I., and Nagy, I.: Effect of inbreeding on lean meat percentage and average daily gain in Hungarian Landrace pigs, Arch. Anim. Breed., 51, 541–548, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-51-541-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/aab-51-541-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Vyas, J., Chopra, A., Pannu, U., Saran, R. K., and Narula, H. K.: Population
structure of Marwari sheep through pedigree analysis, Small Ruminant Res.,
206, 106590, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106590" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106590</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Inbreeding in the Zwartbles breed population and its influence on meat production in the Czech Republic</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bessa, A. F. D., Duarte, I. N. H., Rola, L. D., Bernardes, P. A., Neto, S.
G., Lobo, R. B., Munari, D. P., and Buzanskas, M. E.: Genetic evaluation for
reproductive and productive traits in Brahman cattle, Theriogenology, 173,
261–268, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2021.08.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2021.08.008</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Boujenane, I., Chikhi, A., Ibnelbachyr, M., and Mouh, F. Z.: Estimation of
genetic parameters and maternal effects for body weight at different ages in
D'man sheep, Small Ruminant Res., 130, 27–35,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.07.025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.07.025</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cesarani, A., Mastrangelo, S., Congiu, M., Portolano, B., Gaspa, G., Tolone,
M., and Macciotta, N. P. P.: Relationship between inbreeding and milk
production traits in two Italian dairy sheep breeds, J. Anim. Breed. Genet.,
140, 28–38, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jbg.12741" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/jbg.12741</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cortellari, M., Negro, A., Bionda, A., Grande, S., Cesarani, A., Carta, A.,
Macciotta, N., Biffani, S., and Crepaldi, P.: Using Pedigree and Genomic
Data toward Better Management of Inbreeding in Italian Dairy Sheep and Goat
Breeds, Animals, 12, 2828, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12202828" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12202828</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
da Silva, M., Malhado, C. H. M., Kern, E. L., Daltro, D. D., Cobuci, J. A.,
and Carneiro, P. L. S.: Inbreeding depression in Holstein cattle in Brazil,
Rev. Bras. Zootecn., 48, e20170212, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1590/rbz4820170212" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1590/rbz4820170212</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dorostkar, M., Arough, H. F., Shodja, J., Rafat, S. A., Rokouei, M., and
Esfandyari, H.: Inbreeding and Inbreeding Depression in Iranian Moghani
Sheep Breed, J. Agr. Sci. Technol., 14, 549–556, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Eteqadi, B., Hossein-Zadeh, N. G., and Shadparvar, A. A.: Population
structure and inbreeding effects on body weight traits of Guilan sheep in
Iran, Small Ruminant Res., 119, 45–51, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.03.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.03.003</a>,
2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Fetherstone, N., McGovern, F. M., Boland, T. M., and McHugh, N.: How does
maternal genetic merit and country of origin impact lamb performance pre-
and post-weaning?, Small Ruminant Res., 209, 106642,
do:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2022.106642, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ilic, Z., Jevtic-Vukmirovic, A., Petrovic, M. P., Caro-Petrovic, V.,
Milosevic, B., Spasic, Z., and Ristanovic, B.: Effect of mating method, sex
and birth type on growth of lambs, Biotechnol. Anim. Husbandry, 29, 277–286,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2298/bah1302277i" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2298/bah1302277i</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kiya, C. K., Pedrosa, V. B., Muniz, K. F. A., Gusmão, A. L., and
Batista, L. F. P.: Population structure of a nucleus herd of Dorper sheep
and inbreeding effects on growth, carcass, and reproductive traits, Small
Ruminant Res., 177, 141–145, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2019.06.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2019.06.015</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Komprda, T., Kuchtik, J., Jarosova, A., Drackova, E., Zemanek, L., and
Filipcik, B.: Meat quality characteristics of lambs of three organically
raised breeds, Meat Sci., 91, 499–505, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.03.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.03.004</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kvame, T. and Vangen, O.: Selection for lean weight based on ultrasound and
CT in a meat line of sheep, Livest. Sci., 106, 232–242,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.08.007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.08.007</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lozada-Soto, E. A., Maltecca, C., Lu, D., Miller, S., Cole, J. B., and
Tiezzi, F.: Trends in genetic diversity and the effect of inbreeding in
American Angus cattle under genomic selection, Genet. Sel. Evol., 53, 1–15,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-021-00644-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-021-00644-z</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Maniatis, N. and Pollott, G. E.: Maternal effects on weight and
ultrasonically measured traits of lambs in a small closed Suffolk flock,
Small Ruminant Res., 45, 235–246, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-4488(02)00114-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-4488(02)00114-1</a>, 2002.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Matos, É. J. A. and Lôbo, R. N. B.: Population structure and
inbreeding effects on growth traits of Morada Nova sheep, Livest. Sci., 251, 104625,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104625" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104625</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mc Parland, S., Kearney, J. F., MacHugh, D. E., and Berry, D. P.: Inbreeding
effects on postweaning production traits, conformation, and calving
performance in Irish beef cattle, J. Anim. Sci., 86, 3338–3347,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0751" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0751</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
McGovern, F. M., McHugh, N., Fitzmaurice, S., Pabiou, T., McDermott, K.,
Wall, E., and Fetherstone, N.: Phenotypic factors associated with lamb live
weight and carcass composition measurements in an Irish multi-breed sheep
population, Translat. Anim. Sci., 4, 1–9, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa206" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txaa206</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Norberg, E. and Sorensen, A. C.: Inbreeding trend and inbreeding depression
in the Danish populations of Texel, Shropshire, and Oxford Down, J. Anim. Sci.,
85, 299–304, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-257" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-257</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Paiva, R. D. M., de Sousa, J. E. R., Ferreira, J., Cunha, E. E., de Paiva,
M. P. S. L. M., Gouveia, A. M. G., and Facó, O.: Population structure
and effect of inbreeding on milk yield of Saanen goats in Brazilian
production systems, Small Ruminant Res., 192,  106194,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2020.106194" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2020.106194</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
SAS Institute: SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide; SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2004.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Selvaggi, M., Dario, C., Peretti, V., Ciotola, F., Carnicella, D., and
Dario, M.: Inbreeding depression in Leccese sheep, Small Ruminant Res., 89,
42–46, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.12.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.12.005</a>, 2010.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Signer-Hasler, H., Burren, A., Ammann, P., Drogemuller, C., and Flury, C.:
Extent of genomic inbreeding in Swiss sheep and goat breeds, Agrarforsch.
Schweiz., 10, 372–379, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tsiokos, D. and Ligda, C.: Monitoring inbreeding and selection on scrapie
resistance in a closed nucleus of Florina sheep breed, Small Ruminant Res.,
201, 106422, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106422" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106422</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Vígh, Z., Gyovai, P., Csató, L., Bokor, Á., Farkas, J., Radnóczi, L., Komlósi, I., and Nagy, I.: Effect of inbreeding on lean meat percentage and average daily gain in Hungarian Landrace pigs, Arch. Anim. Breed., 51, 541–548, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-51-541-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-51-541-2008</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Vyas, J., Chopra, A., Pannu, U., Saran, R. K., and Narula, H. K.: Population
structure of Marwari sheep through pedigree analysis, Small Ruminant Res.,
206, 106590, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106590" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106590</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
