ArticleTranslational animal science2025
Estimation of economic weights for growth, feed efficiency, health, and fertility traits in a breeding program for meat rabbits.
Article in Translational animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Genetic Parameter Estimation and Breeding Value Ranking for Litter Size Traits in Meat Rabbits: REML and Bayesian Inference Under Limited Data Conditions.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The definition of breeding objectives in meat rabbits' breeding programs requires assigning economic weights to relevant traits. Our objective in this study was to estimate economic values for 12 key traits in meat rabbit production by calculating the first partial derivative of the profit function in a full-cycle production system. The model was parameterized to represent a semi-technified farm with 250 does managed in two triweekly groups, with natural mating occurring at 11 d postpartum. Economic data were expressed in U.S. dollars. Production costs were categorized into feed and non-feed costs associated with adult does, replacement does, bucks, replacement bucks, and growing rabbits. Revenues were derived from carcasses, pelts, and culled animals. Relative economic values (REV), expressed per doe per year, were obtained by multiplying the absolute economic value of each trait by its respective additive standard deviation. Feed costs accounted for 72.8% of the total. The REVs for litter size traits were $46.05 for the number of kits born alive, $42.83 for the total number of kits born, and $0.22 for the proportion of kits born alive. Efficiency traits' REV were -$6.93 for feed conversion ratio, $0.08 for feed efficiency, $2.98 for daily weight gain during the fattening period, and $0.14 for carcass yield. The functional traits' REV were $0.03 for female fertility, $0.002 for replacement doe fertility, and $0.57 for longevity. Health traits' REV were $0.18 and $0.19 for survival during lactation and fattening, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that increasing feed costs by 50% and carcass rabbit sale price by 40% resulted in changes ≤ 4% for most traits in the relative proportion of economic values, compared to that of the number of kits born alive. The traits with higher changes were efficiency traits (1-16%) and mainly feed conversion ratio (15-136%). The estimated economic values provide a basis for defining breeding objectives under the given production and market conditions. The methodological framework allows adaptation of selection goals to market fluctuations and the incorporation of new traits as they become relevant. Although the economic weights were relatively stable under these variations, it is recommended that they be re-estimated periodically.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.