In addition, the combination of exact phenotypic data derived from non-invasive techniques in combination with (whole) genome data will provide more knowledge and deeper insight into the control of growth and body/carcass composition of farm animals (Cavanagh et al., 2010; Rothammer et al., 2014).
More than 30 years ago, the first papers dealing with X-ray-based computed tomography (CT; Skjervold et al., 1981) and nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (tomography – MRI: Groeneveld et al., 1983; even earlier spectroscopy, Casey and Miles, 1974) for the evaluation of meat or carcass and body composition of farm animals were published.
The probability of transmission depends on the distance between farms (i.e. the kernel) and the species composition of the farms.
The paper sustains the hypothesis of differentiation in the access to policies, due to demographic factors in the composition of family farms.
The composition of algal farms was compared among ecomorphs and among species within each ecomorph, and the effect of habitat depth on the composition was analysed.
This study revealed that the phototrophic composition of algal farms was quite different among species, even those in the same feeding ecomorph, because of habitat depth segregation among species.
The Canberra distance in phototroph composition of algal farms and those of stomach contents were compared using the Mantel test with 9,999 permutations, and the dissimilarities of algal farms and stomach contents were compared with differences in habitat depth using the Mantel test with 9,999 permutations.
Allowing for non-random mixing between species indicates contacts between farms are assortative on the basis of species composition of the farm; i.e. like species mix with like.
The considerable differences were observed in the frequency and on-farm composition of genotypes across farms, as witnessed by the spatial distribution of genotypes with widely differing degrees of lineage admixture (Figure 5).
