IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/pawjal/319741.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Central Performance Testing: Purpose, Benefits, Impacts, and Trends

Author

Listed:
  • Gipson, Terry A.

Abstract

The premise of the central performance test is that differences in performance of young animals raised in a common environment are largely attributed to genetics; however, this can be confounded by differences in pre-test environments. It is assumed top-ranking individual’s genetic advantage is a permanent change transferable to the next generation. The popularity of the central performance tests has waxed and waned over the past decades. A strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats analysis indicates factors influencing producer participation can include cost, time, geographical coverage, alignment with industry, association support, and relevancy. A second generation of central performance tests with innovative, targeted approaches is needed to face the challenges of the goat industry. Genomics has the potential to impact all aspects of the livestock industry, including central performance testing. However, the building of a reference population large enough to yield meaningful genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) takes time. The future of central performance test remains unknown.

Suggested Citation

  • Gipson, Terry A., 2020. "Central Performance Testing: Purpose, Benefits, Impacts, and Trends," Professional Agricultural Workers Journal (PAWJ), Professional Agricultural Workers Conference, vol. 6(3), January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pawjal:319741
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.319741
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/319741/files/Central%20Performance%20Testing_%20Purpose%20Benefits%20Impacts%20and%20Trends.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.319741?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shrestha, Ram K. & Alavalapati, Janaki R. R. & Kalmbacher, Robert S., 2004. "Exploring the potential for silvopasture adoption in south-central Florida: an application of SWOT-AHP method," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 185-199, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin, 2020. "Prospective assessment of methanol vehicles in China using FANP-SWOT analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 60-75.
    2. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Elżbieta M. Zębek & Jakub J. Zięty, 2022. "Effect of Landfill Arson to a “Lax” System in a Circular Economy under the Current EU Energy Policy: Perspective Review in Waste Management Law," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    5. Collins Okello & Stefania Pindozzi & Salvatore Faugno & Lorenzo Boccia, 2014. "Appraising Bioenergy Alternatives in Uganda Using Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT)-Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and a Desirability Functions Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-22, February.
    6. Ho, William, 2008. "Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 211-228, April.
    7. Uddin, Mohammad Nizam & Hossain, Mohammad Mosharraf & Chen, Yong & Siriwong, Wapakorn & Boonyanuphap, Jaruntorn, 2019. "Stakeholders' perception on indigenous community-based management of village common forests in Chittagong hill tracts, Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 102-112.
    8. Qiang Wang & Thomas Dogot & Yueling Yang & Jian Jiao & Boyang Shi & Changbin Yin, 2020. "From “Coal to Gas” to “Coal to Biomass”: The Strategic Choice of Social Capital in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    9. Ting Fan & Dong Qian Xue, 2018. "Sustainable Development of Cultural Industry in Shaanxi Province of Northwest China: A SWOT and AHP Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    10. Kenneth Dunn & Lori Unruh Snyder & James McCarter & Gregory Frey & Joshua Idassi & David Schnake & Frederick Cubbage, 2021. "Bioeconomic Assessment of an Alley Cropping Field Trial in North Carolina, U.S.: Tree Density, Timber Production, and Forage Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    11. Sepehr Ghazinoory & Mansoureh Abdi & Mandana Azadegan-Mehr, 2010. "Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A Framework for the Future," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 24-48, November.
    12. Zelin Liu & Xiyan Duan & Hongling Cheng & Zhaoran Liu & Ping Li & Yang Zhang, 2023. "Empowering High-Quality Development of the Chinese Sports Education Market in Light of the “Double Reduction” Policy: A Hybrid SWOT-AHP Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Matta, Jagannadha & Alavalapati, Janaki & Tanner, George, 2007. "A framework for developing marked-based policies to further biodiversity on non-industrial private forests (NIPF)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 779-788, April.
    14. Tahseen, Samiha & Karney, Bryan, 2017. "Opportunities for increased hydropower diversion at Niagara: An sSWOT analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 757-770.
    15. Omkar Joshi & Rajan Parajuli & Gehendra Kharel & Neelam C Poudyal & Eric Taylor, 2018. "Stakeholder opinions on scientific forest management policy implementation in Nepal," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, September.
    16. Mainali, Bandita & Ngo, Huu Hao & Guo, Wenshan & Pham, Thi Thu Nga & Johnston, Archie, 2011. "Feasibility assessment of recycled water use for washing machines in Australia through SWOT analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 87-91.
    17. Federica Cisilino & Alessandro Monteleone, 2020. "Designing Rural Policies for Sustainable Innovations through a Participatory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, November.
    18. Darshini, Dina & Dwivedi, Puneet & Glenk, Klaus, 2013. "Capturing stakeholders´ views on oil palm-based biofuel and biomass utilisation in Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1128-1137.
    19. Cynthia J. Mkong & Tahirou Abdoulaye & Paul Martin Dontsop-Nguezet & Zoumana Bamba & Victor Manyong & Godlove Shu, 2021. "Determinant of University Students’ Choices and Preferences of Agricultural Sub-Sector Engagement in Cameroon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    20. Radhwan Sneesl & Yusmadi Yah Jusoh & Marzanah A. Jabar & Salfarina Abdullah & Umar Ali Bukar, 2022. "Factors Affecting the Adoption of IoT-Based Smart Campus: An Investigation Using Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-21, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:pawjal:319741. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://tuspubs.tuskegee.edu/pawj/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.