Article

Received 25.12.2025

Revised 14.04.2026

Accepted 26.05.2026

Published 30.06.2026

Retrieved from Volume 30, No. 2, 2026

Pages 30 -40

Karatieiev, A., Karatieieva, О., & Gill, M. (2026). The effect of industrial crossbreeding with terminal line boars on the growth and development of young pigs. Ukrainian Black Sea Region Agrarian Science, 30(2), 30-40. https://doi.org/10.56407/bs.agrarian/2.2026.30

The effect of industrial crossbreeding with terminal line boars on the growth and development of young pigs

Andrii Karatieiev Оlena Karatieieva Michael Gill

One of the most effective methods of genetic improvement in pigs is crossbreeding, which, when based on carefully selected breed combinations, contributes to increased productivity and reduced costs in pig production. The aim of the study was to assess the influence of different maternal genotypes, when crossed with terminal boars of the MaxGrow line, on growth parameters, weight gain, final live weight of piglets and the level of heterosis under commercial pig farming conditions. Experimental studies were conducted on three groups of pigs comprising purebred, crossbred (½ Large White × ½ Landrace of English selection) and specialised sows from Genesus, using terminal boars of the MaxGrow line. This approach ensured an objective assessment of the influence of the maternal genotype on the growth parameters of the offspring under conditions of a standardised paternal component. It was established that the sows’ genotype is a determining factor in growth rate, daily weight gain and final live weight of the piglets. The highest values for absolute (107.37 kg), average daily (596.5 g) and relative (32.3%) weight gains throughout the entire rearing period were observed in pigs of the Genesus×MaxGrow genotype, indicating the effective realisation of the heterosis effect. Crossbred animals occupied an intermediate position (104.6 kg; 578.7 g and 32.0% respectively), demonstrating a consistent advantage over the purebred control (100.82 kg; 560.1 g and 30.5% respectively). The results of the growth index assessment and two-way analysis of variance confirmed the dominant role of genotype (38.0-56.0%) in the formation of productive traits and the high reliability of the data obtained. It was concluded that the use of MaxGrow terminal boars in combination with specialised and crossbred maternal lines is a scientifically sound and technologically feasible approach to improving breeding programmes in commercial pig farming. It can be utilised by breeding specialists and pig farm technologists to optimise industrial crossbreeding schemes with the aim of increasing the growth rate of young stock and the efficiency of pork production

breeding programmes; terminal boars; heterosis effect; hybrid vigour; specialised lines; growth rate
  1. Bankolé, C.B., Dotché, I.O., Ahounou, S.G., Dahouda, M., Karim, I.Y.A., & Senou, M. (2025). Improving the growth performance of local pigs in Benin by crossbreeding with the stress-negative Pietrain. Reproduction and Breeding, 5(3), 95-101. doi: 10.1016/j.repbre.2025.05.004.
  2. Baranovskyi, D., & Tkachuk, O. (2024). Productive characteristics of pigs of different origin. Scientific and Technical Bulletin of Livestock Farming Institute of NAAS of Ukraine, 131, 19-31. doi: 10.32900/2312-8402-2024-131-19-31.
  3. Cao, M., Yuan, T., Li, D., Li, X., Huang, Y., Sun, J., & Yu, T. (2026). The hybridization analysis of pedigree: Whole-genome re-sequencing reveals genomics characterization and genetic basis of growth trait of Qinchuan black pigs. BMC Genomics, 27, article number 239. doi: 10.1186/s12864-025-12439-3.
  4. Council Directive No. 98/58/EC “Concerning the Protection of Animals Kept for Farming Purposes”. (1998, July). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1998/58/oj.
  5. De Prekel, L., Maes, D., Van den Broeke, A., Goethals, S., Millet, S., Ampe, B., & Aluwé, M. (2025). Effect of terminal sire line on heat stress responses in growing-fattening pigs selected for optimal growth rate vs optimal carcass quality. Animal, 19(11), article number 101641. doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2025.101641.
  6. Dotché, I. O., Idohou, S., Dahouda, M., Kiki, P., Govoeyi, B., Antoine-Moussiaux, N., & Koutinhouin, B. (2019). Crossbreeding and consanguinity management in pig farms in the departments of Ouémé and Plateau in Benin. Veterinary World, 12(11), 1816-1825. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2019.1816-1825.
  7. Duenk, P., Bijma, P., Wientjes, Y.C., & Calus, M.P. (2021). Optimizing genomic selection for crossbred performance by model improvement and data collection. Journal of Animal Science, 99(8), article number skab205. doi: 10.1093/jas/skab205.
  8. Fabbri, M.C., Lozada-Soto, E., Tiezzi, F., Čandek-Potokar, M., Bovo, S., Schiavo, G., Fontanesi, L., Muñoz, M., Ovilo, C., & Bozzi, R. (2024). Persistence of autozygosity in crossbreds between autochthonous and cosmopolitan breeds of swine: A simulation study. Animal, 18(2), article number 101070. doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2023.101070.
  9. Ganteil, A., Rodriguez-Ramilo, S.T., Ligonesche, B., & Larzul, C. (2021). Characterization of autozygosity in pigs in three-way crossbreeding. Frontiers in Genetics, 11, article number 584556. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2020.584556.
  10. Harmatiuk, K.V. (2022). Methods for increasing pig productivity in modern conditions in southern Ukraine. (PhD dissertation, Odesa State Agrarian University, Odesa, Ukraine).
  11. Kadirvel, G., Devi, Y.S., Naskar, S., Bujarbaruah, K.M., Khargariah, G., Banik, S., & Gonmei, C. (2023). Performance of crossbred pigs with indigenous and Hampshire inheritance under a smallholder production system in the Eastern Himalayan hill region. Frontiers in Genetics, 14, article number 1042554. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1042554.
  12. Kramarenko, A.S., Karatieieva, O.I., LіutaI, M., & Kramarenko, S.S. (2024). Genetic and non-genetic factors influencing piglet stillbirth risk. Regulatory Mechanisms in Biosystems, 15(4), 875-881. doi: 10.15421/0224126.
  13. Kramarenko, S.S., Lugovyi S.I., Lykhach A.V., & Kramarenko O.S. (2019). Analysis of biometric data in animal breeding and selection. Mykolaiv: Mykolaiv National Agrarian University.
  14. Kremez, M., Povod, M., Mykhalko, O., Verbelchuk, T., Verbelchuk, S., Koberniuk, V., Borshchenko, V., Kalynychenko, H., & Onishenko, L. (2024). Efficiency of breeding of purebred crossbred and hybrid piglets of the English breed. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 24(4), 485-498.
  15. Nalon, E., & Stevenson, P. (2019). Protection of dairy cattle in the EU: State of play and directions for policymaking from a legal and animal advocacy perspective. Animals, 9(12), article number 1066. doi: 10.3390/ani9121066.
  16. Navarro, D., & Foxcroft, D.R. (2025). Learning statistics with JAMOVI: A tutorial for beginners in statistical analysis. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers. doi: 10.11647/OBP.0333.
  17. Nevrkla, P., Lujka, J., Kopec, T., Horký, P., Filipčík, R., Hadaš, Z., & Střechová, V. (2021). Combined effect of sow parity and terminal boar on losses of piglets and pre-weaning growth intensity of piglets. Animals, 11(11), article number 3287. doi: 10.3390/ani11113287.
  18. Pereira-Pinto, R., Araújo, J.P., Cerqueira, J., Mata, F., Pires, P., & Vaz-Velho, M. (2025). Raising entire male pigs: Comparison of growth performance and meat quality of the Bísara breed and a terminal cross-a pilot study. Frontiers in Animal Science, 6, article number 1433925. doi: 10.3389/fanim.2025.1433925.
  19. Sokal, R.R.? & Rohlf, F.J. (1995). Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. New York: W.H. Freeman.
  20. Steyn, Y., Lourenco, D.A., Chen, C.Y., Valente, B.D., Holl, J., Herring, W.O., & Misztal, I. (2021). Optimal definition of contemporary groups for crossbred pigs in a joint purebred and crossbred genetic evaluation. Journal of Animal Science, 99(1), article number skaa396. doi: 10.1093/jas/skaa396.
  21. Turner, S.P., Camerlink, I., Baxter, E.M., D’Eath, R.B., Desire, S., & Roehe, R. (2024). Breeding for pig welfare: Opportunities and challenges. In Advances in pig welfare (pp. 429-447). Cambridgeshire: Woodhead Publishing. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-85676-8.00003-1.
  22. Vaishnav, S., Saini, T., Ahmad, S.F., Gaur, G.K., Mehrotra, A., & Chauhan, A. (2025). Breeding management in commercial pig farms. In Commercial pig farming (pp. 29-46). Cambridge: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-443-23769-0.00003-8.
  23. Wen, H., Blackburn, H.D., Mulim, H.A., Oliveira, H.R., Hermesch, S., Chen, C.-Y., Holl, J., Schinckel, A.P., & Brito, L.F. (2026). Characterization of genomic diversity and population structure of worldwide Duroc subpopulations and other pig breeds. Genetics Selection Evolution, 58(1), article number 1. doi: 10.1186/s12711-025-01017-6.
  24. Zhou, J., et al. (2024). Evaluating the performance of genomic selection on purebred population by incorporating crossbred data in pigs. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 23(2), 639-648. doi: 10.1016/j.jia.2023.09.004.