Selection for environmental variance of litter size in rabbits

[EN] Background: In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the genetic determination of environmental variance. In the case of litter size, environmental variance can be related to the capacity of animals to adapt to new environmental conditions, which can improve animal welfare. Results: We developed a ten-generation divergent selection experiment on environmental variance. We selected one line of rabbits for litter size homogeneity and one line for litter size heterogeneity by measuring intra-doe phenotypic variance. We proved that environmental variance of litter size is genetically determined and can be modified by selection. Response to selection was 4.5% of the original environmental variance per generation. Litter size was consistently higher in the Low line than in the High line during the entire experiment. Conclusions: We conclude that environmental variance of litter size is genetically determined based on the results of our divergent selection experiment. This has implications for animal welfare, since animals that cope better with their environment have better welfare than more sensitive animals. We also conclude that selection for reduced environmental variance of litter size does not depress litter size.This research was funded by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (Spain), Projects AGL2014-55921, C2-1-P and C2-2-P. Marina Martínez-Alvaro has a Grant from the same funding source, BES-2012-052655.Blasco Mateu, A.; Martínez Álvaro, M.; García Pardo, MDLL.; Ibáñez Escriche, N.; Argente, MJ. (2017). Selection for environmental variance of litter size in rabbits. Genetics Selection Evolution. 49(48):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-017-0323-4S184948Morgante F, Sørensen P, Sorensen DA, Maltecca C, Mackay TFC. Genetic architecture of micro-environmental plasticity in Drosophila melanogaster. Sci Rep. 2015;5:9785.Sørensen P, de los Campos G, Morgante F, Mackay TFC, Sorensen D. Genetic control of environmental variation of two quantitative traits of Drosophila melanogaster revealed by whole-genome sequencing. Genetics. 2015;201:487–97.Zhang XS, Hill WG. Evolution of the environmental component of the phenotypic variance: stabilizing selection in changing environments and the homogeneity cost. Evolution. 2005;59:1237–44.Mulder HA, Bijma P, Hill WG. Selection for uniformity in livestock by exploiting genetic heterogeneity of residual variance. Genet Sel Evol. 2008;40:37–59.Bodin L, Bolet G, Garcia M, Garreau H, Larzul C, David I. Robustesse et canalisation, vision de généticiens. INRA Prod Anim. 2010;23:11–22.García ML, Argente MJ, Muelas R, Birlanga V, Blasco A. Effect of divergent selection for residual variance of litter size on health status and welfare. In: Proceedings of the 10th World Rabbit Congress. Sharm El-Sheikh; 2012. p. 103–6.Argente MJ, García ML, Zbynovska K, Petruska P, Capcarova M, Blasco A. Effect of selection for residual variance of litter size on hematology parameters as immunology indicators in rabbits. In: Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on genetics applied to livestock production. Vancouver; 2014.García ML, Zbynovska K, Petruska P, Bovdisová I, Kalafová A, Capcarova M, et al. Effect of selection for residual variance of litter size on biochemical parameters in rabbits. In: Proceedings of the 67th annual meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science. Belfast; 2016.Broom DM. Welfare assessment and relevant ethical decisions: key concepts. Annu Rev Biomed Sci. 2008;20:79–90.SanCristobal-Gaudy M, Bodin L, Elsen JM, Chevalet C. Genetic components of litter size variability in sheep. Genet Sel Evol. 2001;33:249–71.Sorensen D, Waagepetersen R. Normal linear models with genetically structured residual variance heterogeneity: a case study. Genet Res. 2003;82:207–22.Mulder HA, Hill WG, Knol EF. Heritable environmental variance causes nonlinear relationships between traits: application to birth weight and stillbirth of pigs. Genetics. 2015;199:1255–69.Ros M, Sorensen D, Waagepetersen R, Dupont-Nivet M, San Cristobal M, Bonnet JC. Evidence for genetic control of adult weight plasticity in the snail Helix aspersa. Genetics. 2004;168:2089–97.Gutiérrez JP, Nieto B, Piqueras P, Ibáñez N, Salgado C. Genetic parameters for components analysis of litter size and litter weight traits at birth in mice. Genet Sel Evol. 2006;38:445–62.Ibáñez-Escriche N, Sorensen D, Waagepetersen R, Blasco A. Selection for environmental variation: a statistical analysis and power calculations to detect response. Genetics. 2008;180:2209–26.Wolc A, White IM, Avendano S, Hill WG. Genetic variability in residual variation of body weight and conformation scores in broiler chickens. Poult Sci. 2009;88:1156–61.Fina M, Ibáñez-Escriche N, Piedrafita J, Casellas J. Canalization analysis of birth weight in Bruna dels Pirineus beef cattle. J Anim Sci. 2013;91:3070–8.Mulder HA, Rönnegård L, Fikse WF, Veerkamp RF, Strandberg E. Estimation of genetic variance for macro- and micro-environmental sensitivity using double hierarchical generalized linear models. Genet Sel Evol. 2013;45:23.Janhunen M, Kause A, Vehviläinen H, Järvisalom O. Genetics of microenvironmental sensitivity of body weight in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) selected for improved growth. PLoS One. 2012;7:e38766.Sonesson AK, Ødegård J, Rönnegård L. Genetic heterogeneity of within-family variance of body weight in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Genet Sel Evol. 2013;45:41.Garreau H, Bolet G, Larzul C, Robert-Granie C, Saleil G, SanCristobal M, et al. Results of four generations of a canalising selection for rabbit birth weight. Livest Sci. 2008;119:55–62.Pun A, Cervantes I, Nieto B, Salgado C, Pérez-Cabal MA, Ibáñez-Escriche N, et al. Genetic parameters for birth weight environmental variability in mice. J Anim Breed Genet. 2012;130:404–14.Hill WG, Mulder HA. Genetic analysis of environmental variation. Genet Res (Camb). 2010;92:381–95.Yang Y, Christensen OF, Sorensen D. Analysis of a genetically structured variance heterogeneity model using the Box–Cox transformation. Genet Res (Camb). 2011;93:33–46.Piles M, Garcia ML, Rafel O, Ramon J, Baselga M. Genetics of litter size in three maternal lines of rabbits: repeatability versus multiple-trait models. J Anim Sci. 2006;84:2309–15.Estany J, Baselga M, Blasco A, Camacho J. Mixed model methodology for the estimation of genetic response to selection in litter size of rabbits. Livest Prod Sci. 1989;21:67–75.Box GEP, Tiao GC. Bayesian inference in statistical analysis. New York: Wiley; 1973.Searle SR. Matrix algebra useful for statistics. Toronto: Wiley; 1982.Sorensen D, Gianola D. Likelihood, Bayesian and MCMC methods in quantitative genetics. New York: Springer; 2002.Geyer CM. Practical Markov chain Monte Carlo (with discussion). Stat Sci. 1992;7:467–511.Legarra A. TM threshold model. 2008. http://genoweb.toulouse.inra.fr/~alegarra/tm_folder/ . Accessed 02 May 2017.Blasco A. Bayesian data analysis for animal scientists. New York: Springer; 2017.Rönnegård L, Felleki M, Fikse F, Mulder HA, Strandberg E. Genetic heterogeneity of residual variance—estimation of variance components using double hierarchical generalized linear models. Genet Sel Evol. 2010;42:8.Felleki M, Lee D, Lee Y, Gilmour AR, Rönnegård L. Estimation of breeding values for mean and dispersion, their variance and correlation using double hierarchical generalized linear models. Genet Res (Camb). 2012;94:307–17.Thompson R. Estimation of realized heritability in a selected population using mixed model methods. Genet Sel Evol. 1986;18:475–84.Sorensen DA, Johansson K. Estimation of direct and correlated responses to selection using univariate animal models. J Anim Sci. 1992;70:2038–44.Popper K. The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson & Co; 1959.Falconer DS, MacKay TFC. An introduction to quantitative genetics. 4th ed. Harlow: Longman Group Ltd; 1996.Formoso-Rafferty N, Cervantes I, Ibáñez-Escriche N, Gutiérrez JP. Correlated genetic trends for production and welfare traits in a mouse population divergently selected for birth weight environmental variability. Animal. 2016;10:1770–7.Ibáñez-Escriche N, Moreno A, Nieto B, Piqueras P, Salgado C, Gutiérrez JP. Genetic parameters related to environmental variability of weight traits in a selection experiment for weight gain in mice; signs of correlated canalised response. Genet Sel Evol. 2008;40:279–93.Mulder HA, Hill WG, Vereijken A, Veerkamp RF. Estimation of genetic variation in residual variance in female and male broiler chickens. Animal. 2009;3:1673–80.Ibáñez-Escriche N, Varona L, Sorensen D, Noguera JL. A study of heterogeneity of environmental variance for slaughter weight in pigs. Animal. 2008;2:19–26.Bolet G, Garreau H, Hurtaud J, Saleil G, Esparbié J, Falieres J. Canalising selection on within litter variability of birth weight in rabbits: responses to selection and characteristics of the uterus of the does. In: Proceedings of the 9th World Rabbit Congress. Verona; 2008. p. 51–6.San Cristobal-Gaudy M, Elsen JM, Bodin L, Chevalet C. Prediction of the response to a selection for canalisation of a continuous trait in animal breeding. Genet Sel Evol. 1998;30:423–51.Argente MJ, Santacreu MA, Climent A, Blasco A. Genetic correlations between litter size and uterine capacity. In: Proceeding of the 8th World Rabbit Congress. Valencia; 2000. p. 333–38.Rauw WM. Immune response from a resource allocation perspective. Front Genet. 2012;3:267

Hybrid method for selection of the optimal process of leachate treatment in waste treatment and valorization plants or landfills

“The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10098-014-0834-4”Leachate from waste landfill or treatment plants is a very complex and highly contaminated liquid effluent. In its composition, it is found dissolved organic matter, inorganic salts, heavy metals, and other xenobiotic organic compounds, so it can be toxic, carcinogenic, and capable of inducing a potential risk to biota and humans. European law does not allow such leachate to leave the premises without being depolluted. There are many procedures that enable debugging, always combining different techniques. Choosing the best method to use in each case is a complex decision, as it depends on many tangible and intangible factors that must be weighed to achieve a balance between technical, cost, and environmental sustainability. It is presenting a hybrid method for choosing the optimal combination of techniques to apply in each case, by combining a multicriteria hierarchical analysis based on expert data obtained by the Delphi method with an analysis by the method of VIKOR to reach a consensus solution.Martín Utrillas, MG.; Reyes Medina, M.; Curiel Esparza, J.; Cantó Perelló, J. (2015). Hybrid method for selection of the optimal process of leachate treatment in waste treatment and valorization plants or landfills. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy. 17(4):873-885. doi:10.1007/s10098-014-0834-4S873885174Abbas AA, Guo J, Ping LZ, Ya PY, Al-Rekabi WS (2009) Review on landfill leachate treatments. AJAS 6(4):672–684Abood AR, Bao J, Abudi Z, Zheng D, Gao C (2013) Pretreatment of nonbiodegradable landfill leachate by air stripping coupled with agitation as ammonia stripping and coagulation–flocculation processes. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15(6):1069–1076Ahn WY, Kang MS, Yim SK, Choi KH (2002) Advanced landfill leachate treatment using an integrated membrane process. Desalination 149(1–3):109–114Al-Subhi Al-Harbi KM (2001) Application of the AHP in project management. Int J Proj Manag 19:19–27Bernasconi M, Choirat C, Seri R (2014) Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: theory and evidence. Eur J Oper Res 232(3):584–592Boopathy R, Karthikeyan S, Mandal AB, Sekaran G (2013) Characterization and recovery of sodium chloride from salt-laden solid waste generated from leather industry. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15(1):117–124Brechet T, Tulkens H (2009) Beyond BAT: selecting optimal combinations of available techniques, with an example from the limestone industry. J Environ Manag 90:1790–1801Canto-Perello J, Curiel-Esparza J, Calvo V (2013) Criticality and threat analysis on utility tunnels for planning security policies of utilities in urban underground space. Expert Syst Appl 40(11):4707–4714Chen Y, Liu C, Nie J, Wu S, Wang D (2014) Removal of COD and decolorizing from landfill leachate by Fenton’s reagent advanced oxidation. Clean Technol Environ Policy 16(1):189–193Chiochetta CG, Goetten LC, Almeida SM, Quaranta G, Cotelle S, Radetski CM (2014) Leachates from solid wastes: chemical and eco(geno)toxicological differences between leachates obtained from fresh and stabilized industrial organic sludge. Environ Sci Pollut R 21:1090–1098Chiumenti A, da Borso F, Chiumenti R, Teri F, Segantin P (2013) Treatment of digestate from a co-digestion biogas plant by means of vacuum evaporation: tests for process optimization and environmental sustainability. Waste Manag 33(6):1339–1344Council Directive 1999/31/EC (1999) April 26th 1999, on the landfill of waste. European Union Council, Official Journal L 182, 16/07/1999 P. 0001–0019Curiel-Esparza J, Canto-Perello J (2012) Understanding the major drivers for implementation of municipal sustainable policies in underground space. Int J Sust Dev World 19(6):506–514Curiel-Esparza J, Canto-Perello J (2013) Selecting utilities placement techniques in urban underground engineering. Arch Civ Mech Eng 13(2):276–285Curiel-Esparza J, Canto-Perello J, Calvo MA (2004) Establishing sustainable strategies in urban underground engineering. Sci Eng Ethics 10(3):523–530Dong Y, Zhang G, Hong WC, Xu Y (2010) Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method. Decis Support Syst 49:281–289Duckstein L, Opricovic S (1980) Multiobjective Optimization in River Basin Development. Water Resour Res 16(1):14–20Ersahin ME, Ozgun H, van Lier JB (2013) Effect of support material properties on dynamic membrane filtration performance. Separ Sci Technol 48(15):2263–2269Gracht HA (2012) Consensus measurement in Delphi studies, review and implications for future quality assurance. Forecast Soc Chang 79(8):1525–1536Grisey E, Laffray X, Contoz O, Cavalli E, Mudry J, Aleya L (2012) The bioaccumulation performance of reeds and cattails in a constructed treatment wetland for removal of heavy metals in landfill leachate treatment (Etueffont, France). Water Air Soil Pollut 223:1723–1741Guoliang Z, Lei Q, Qin M, Zheng F, Dexin W (2013) Aerobic SMBR/reverse osmosis system enhanced by Fenton oxidation for advanced treatment of old municipal landfill leachate. Bioresour Technol 142:261–268Gupta SK, Singh G (2007) Assessment of the Efficiency and Economic Viability of Various Methods of Treatment of Sanitary Landfill Leachate. Environ Monit Assess 135:107–117Heyer KU, Stegmann R (2005) Landfill systems, sanitary landfilling of solid wastes, and long-term problems with leachate. In: Jördening HJ, Winter J (eds) Environmental Biotechnology. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, p 375Hsu CC, Sandord BA (2007) The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. PARE 12(10):1–7Kjeldsen P, Barlaz MA, Rooker AP, Baun A, Ledin A, Christensen TH (2002) Present and long-term composition of MSW landfill leachate: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 32(4):297–336Lee WS (2013) Merger and acquisition evaluation and decision making model. Serv Ind J 33(15–16):1473–1494Lee GKL, Chan EHW (2008) The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach for assessment of urban renewal proposals. Soc Indic Res 89(1):155–168Li G, Wang W, Du Q (2010) Applicability of nanofiltration for the advanced treatment of landfill leachate. J Appl Polym Sci 116(4):2343–2347Mela K, Tiainen T, Heinisuo M (2012) Comparative study of multiple criteria decision making methods for building design. Adv Eng Inform 26:716–726Ozdemir MS, Saaty TL (2006) The unknown in decision making, what to do about it. Eur J Oper Res 174(1):349–359Renou S, Givaudan JG, Poulain S, Dirassouyan F, Moulin P (2008) Landfill leachate treatment: review and opportunity. J Hazard Mater 150(3):468–493Ritzkowski M, Stegmann R (2012) Landfill aeration worldwide: concepts, indications and findings. Waste Manag 32(7):1411–1419Romero C, Ramos P, Costa C, Marquez MC (2013) Raw and digested municipal waste compost leachate as potential fertilizer: comparison with a commercial fertilizer. J Clean Prod 59:73–78Roubelat F (2011) The Delphi method as a ritual: inquiring the Delphi Oracle. Forecast Soc Chang 78(9):1491–1499Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. Mc Graw-Hill, New YorkSaaty TL (2001) Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process, 2nd edn. RWS Publications, PittsburghSaaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98Saaty TL (2012) Decision making for leaders. The analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world, 3rd edn. RWS Publications, PittsburghSan Cristobal J (2012) Contractor selection using multicriteria decision-making methods. J Constr Eng M 138(6):751–758Sayadi MK, Heydari M, Shahanaghi K (2009) Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem with interval numbers. Appl Math Model 33:2257–2262Statnikova RB, Bordetskya A, Statnikov A (2005) Multi-criteria analysis of real-life engineering optimization problems: statement and solution. Nonlinear Anal 63:685–696Syamsuddin J (2010) The use of AHP in security policy decision making: an open office calc application. JSW 5(10):1162–1169Thapa RB, Murayama Y (2010) Drivers of urban growth in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal: examining the efficacy of the analytic hierarchy process. App Geogr 30(1):70–83van Praagh M, Heerenklage J, Smidt E, Modin H, Stegmann R, Persson KM (2009) Potential emissions from two mechanically–biologically pretreated (MBT) wastes. Waste Manag 29(2):859–868Vedaraman N, Shamshath BS, Srinivasan SV (2013) Response surface methodology for decolourisation of leather dye using ozonation in a packed bed reactor. Clean Technol Environ Policy 15(4):607–616Wang Q, Matsufuji Y, Dong L, Huang Q, Hirano F, Tanaka A (2006) Research on leachate recirculation from different types of landfills. Waste Manag 26:815–824Xing W, Lu W, Zhao Y (2013) Environmental impact assessment of leachate recirculation in landfill of municipal solid waste by comparing with evaporation and discharge (EASEWASTE). Waste Manag 33(2):382–389Yang W, Zhang KN, Chen YG, Zhou XZ, Jin FX (2013) Prediction on contaminant migration in aquifer of fractured granite substrata of landfill. J Cent South Univ 20(11):3193–3201Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Tamosaitiene J (2011) Selection of construction enterprises management strategy based on SWOT and multi-criteria analysis. ACME 11(4):1063–108