Open access peer-reviewed chapter

The Genetic Improvement in Meat Rabbits

Written By

María-Luz García and María-José Argente

Submitted: 18 March 2020 Reviewed: 04 September 2020 Published: 30 September 2020

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.93896

From the Edited Volume

Lagomorpha Characteristics

Edited by María-José Argente, María de la Luz García Pardo and Kevin P. Dalton

Chapter metrics overview

544 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Rabbits are raised for many different purposes, such as breeding stock for meat, wool and fur, as an educational and experimental animal model, and as pets and show animals. However, this species is main used for meat production. France, Italy and Spain have an important role in the increase of world rabbit meat production through the development of selection programs in this species. Genetic improvement programs have based on development of maternal lines to improve prolificacy and paternal lines to improve growth rate, but the alternative development of multi-purpose lines for litter size and growth traits will be discussed. In this chapter, the variance components of these traits, the response to selection and the main commercial available lines will be reviewed. Universities and public research centers have played a leading role in the development of these lines and in the diffusion of this genetic material through a pyramid scheme from selection nuclei to farmers. Recently, others functional traits are emerging successfully as selection criteria in breeding programs such as ovulation rate, prenatal survival, longevity, feed efficiency, meat quality, uniformity in production, and resistance to digestive disorders.

Keywords

  • average daily gain
  • feed conversion rate
  • heritability
  • litter size
  • selection

1. Introduction

Rabbits are raised for many different purposes, such as breeding stock for meat, wool and fur, as an educational and experimental animal model, and as pets and show animals. However, this species is used mainly for meat production. China and Mediterranean countries concentrate 78% of world production meat [1]. It must note highlighting the leadership of France, Italy and Spain in development of the rabbit selection programs, which have been key to enhance the efficiency in meat production.

Advertisement

2. Economic important traits in meat rabbits

The selection objectives in breeding programs are established according to the economic importance of the traits. Economic weights in rabbit meat production have been estimated in different markets, such as the Spanish [2, 3], Australian [4] and French one [5], and in all these studies, the litter size and the feed conversion rate have been reported as the most important traits for rabbit industry (see Table 1). The growth rate is easier and cheaper to record than feed conversion rate and has a favourable genetic correlation with it [6]. For this reason, rabbit commercial schemes are based on three-way cross. Two selected lines for litter size at birth or at weaning are crossed to create a commercial doe [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13], which is mated with a terminal sire from other selected line for growth rate post-weaning or for body weight at a point close to market age [14, 15, 16, 17]. The aim of the cross between the maternal lines is to exploit advantage of the expected positive heterosis in reproductive traits, the possible complementarity among the lines and the dispersion of the inbreeding accumulated within the lines [8].

TraitsUnitSpainAustraliaFrance
[2][3][4][5]a
Reproductive traits
Litter sizeIncrease by 116.9015.6615.0345.52
Lactation survivalIncrease by 1%1.961.711.70
Replacement rate per does and yearIncrease by 1%−0.45−0.29−0.23
Growth traits
Daily feed intake during fatteningDecrease by 1 g/d0.410.500.49
Daily gain during fatteningIncrease by 1 g/d1.531.331.2311.82
Feed conversion rate during fatteningDecrease by 0.1 g/g18.8020.1910.26
Healthy
Resistance to enterocolitis4.41

Table 1.

Economic weights of the main traits of the profit function in €/unit of the trait.

Economic weights estimated in a context of restricted feeding.


Advertisement

3. Genetic parameters for litter size and growth traits

Genetic progress in the selection programs depends mainly on the heritability of the selected trait and on the selection intensity. In this section, a review of quantitative genetic components for litter size and growth traits will be carried out. For litter size at birth, the estimates of the heritability show in general low values (0.05 to 0.20 and 0.11 on average) and tended to decrease slight from birth to slaughter (0.00 to 0.13 and 0.08 on average for number born alive, 0.02 to 0.12 and 0.07 on average for litter size at weaning, and 0.06 to 0.08 and 0.07 on average for litter size at slaughter, see Table 2). The estimates of the ratios of permanent environmental variance to the phenotype variance are also rather low for litter size at birth. In agreement to heritability, the estimated values decrease from birth (0.11 on average) to market time (0.08 on average). These findings are an indication of high effect of environmental influence on litter size and the low repeatability. Regarding genetic correlations between litter size traits, the estimates present positive and high values, ranging from +0.96 to +0.99 for litter size at birth and number born alive, and from +0.60 to +0.98 for number born alive and litter size at weaning [11, 24, 33].

LSNBANWNSLine/breedReferences
h2p2h2p2h2p2h2p2
0.200.250.090.12New Zealand White[18]
0.100.070.070.090.070.070.070.06Line selected by OR and LS[19]
0.100.09Environmental Variance of LS[20]
0.110.080.100.090.090.07Line A[10, 21, 22]
0.080.120.050.090.020.07Line H[21, 22]
0.090.100.080.08Line LP[21]
0.090.110.070.13Line R[21, 22]
0.180.090.070.100.050.080.050.07Line V[23]
0.130.050.050.090.020.06ITELV2006 line[24]
0.050.09Pannon White[25]
0.130.100.000.06Pooled Poured Breed[26]
0.050.090.030.09Brazilian Synthetic Line[27]
0.120.060.090.07Pannon Ka[28]
0.050.110.070.11Pannon Large[29]
0.070.100.070.09Pannon White[30]
0.110.090.080.080.060.03Line Prat[10]
0.090.210.120.200.090.160.070.12Local line[31]
0.190.190.080.19Danish While[32]

Table 2.

Heritability (h2) and permanent effect (p2) of litter size at birth (LS), number of kits born alive (NBA), number of kits at weaning (NW) and number of rabbits at slaughter (NS).

OR: ovulation rate.

For growth traits, there are many estimates of heritability for weaning and slaughter weight (see Table 3). The average values of these estimates are moderate (0.18 for weaning weight and 0.22 for slaughter weight). However, these estimates present widely range of values (0.03 to 0.48 for weaning weight and 0.06 to 0.67 for slaughter weight); that can be related to different weaning age, from 28 days in semiintensive management to 42 days of age in extensive management, and different slaughter time, from 9 week in Spain to 13 weeks of age in Italy (see review by [46]). Contrarily, the estimates of heritability for growth rate show a narrow range (0.12 to 0.34) and moderate average value (0.22). A reduced number of studies has been carried out to analyse the genetic determination of feed conversion rate (see Table 3). The average value of heritability for feed conversion rate is similar those of growth rate (0.29), varying in a small range such as growth rate (0.22 to 0.42). The litter effect is especially important for weaning weight (0.47 on average), and in lesser extent for slaughter weight (0.28 on average), growth rate (0.19 on average) and feed conversion rate (0.12 on average). Some studies have also estimated maternal genetic effects for growth traits. Maternal heritability seems to be slightly higher for weaning weight (0.17 on average) than for slaughter weight (0.10 on average). There is only one estimation for growth rate (0.21), and no estimate has found for feed conversion rate in bibliography. In general, maternal genetic effects are much lesser important than litter effects.

WWSWADGFCRLine/BreedReference
h2c2p2h2mh2c2p2h2mh2c2p2h2mh2c2
0.41New Zealand White[34]
0.060.430.130.260.190.130.220.10ConsoResidual line[35]
0.040.330.110.220.220.170.230.16ADGrestrict line[35]
0.150.270.190.140.210.10Line B[36]
0.150.180.150.120.170.10Line R[36]
0.030.640.070.060.380.08ITELV2006 line[24]
0.20a0.25aPannon White[37]
0.270.14Pannon White[38]
0.040.720.120.510.170.40Line selected by body weight at 70 d[15]
0.480.250.390.11Brazilian Synthetic Line[27]
0.080.440.180.080.260.05Brazilian Synthetic Line[27]
0.240.310.010.170.180.180.00Angora line[39]
0.090.350.110.130.280.050.140.270.01Line selected by OR and LS[40]
0.41a0.37a0.34aLine Prat[33]
0.210.170.250.22Line Prat[6]
0.210.120.320.07Line Caldes[41]
0.170.32Danish White[42]
0.420.180.090.270.270.210.21New Zealand White[43]
0.250.440.240.220.220.090.330.07AGP39[44]
0.120.520.140.270.120.120.420.07AGP59[44]
0.090.520.670.260.410.210.270.17Divergent lines for residual feed efficiency[45]

Table 3.

Heritability (h2), common litter effect (c2), permanent effect (p2) and genetic maternal effect (h2m) of weaning weight (WW), slaughter weight (SW), average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion rate (FCR).

OR: ovulation rate. LS: litter size. a: effect included in the model but not display.

Regarding genetic correlations between growth traits, weight at weaning is positive and highly correlated with weight at slaughter in agreement with [24, 33], ranging from +0.61 to +0.74. Genetic correlation between growth rate and weight at slaughter is higher than at weaning (+0.56 vs. +0.31 [33, 47]). Genetic correlation between growth rate and feed conversion rate is negative and moderate (−0.4 to −0.5 [6, 35]). The bibliography is scarce and contradictory for genetic correlations between litter size traits and growth traits. There are high and negative estimates between litter size and weight at weaning (−0.85, −0.92 and −0.85 for litter size at birth, number born alive and litter size at weaning, respectively [24]) and estimates close to zero (−0.05, −0.07 and −0.25 for litter size at birth, number born alive and litter size at weaning, respectively [33]). Indeed, it was reported that increases in litter size resulted in a decrease of individual weight at weaning [48, 49]. The genetic correlations between litter size traits with weight at slaughter (+0.11, +0.03 and −0.16 for litter size at birth, number born alive and litter size at weaning, respectively [33]) and growth rate (+0.04, −0.06 and −0.16 for litter size at birth, number born alive and litter size at weaning, respectively [33]) show also values close to zero.

Selection is more complicated for litter size traits than for growth traits. This complexity is due to the fact that the litter size traits display a low heritability and only express in the does, and consequently selection intensity is lower than when both sexes express the trait [12, 50]. In order to increase the accuracy in estimates of genetic values, and therefore the progress into selection program, it is recommended considering as many individual and relative records as possible for genetic evaluation of the does and males, even though generational interval increases [51]. Selection for average daily gain from weaning to slaughtering has been used traditionally as selection criterion to improve of feed conversion rate thus far, since this trait has a moderate heritability and it is lesser affected to common litter effects than the individual weight at specific age (Table 3). Moreover, it is much easier and cheaper to measure than feed conversion rate and it has a negative favourable correlation with it [6, 35]. However, the development cheap electronic devices nowadays that enable recording of individual feed intake in this species, together moderate heritability of this trait and its moderate genetic correlation with average daily gain (−0.4 to −0.5), have challenged whether selection for average daily gain is the best way to improvement of feed efficiency, instead of direct selection (see review [46]).

Advertisement

4. Selected lines

Traditionally, rabbit commercial schemes have based on development of specialised lines to improve prolificacy (maternal lines) and to improve growth rate (paternal line) as it was commented in Section 2 [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]. However, the foundation and development of specialised lines is an activity with the high requirements, organisation, experience, and money needed, that not all countries can carry out. In countries where the rabbit industry has not yet reached a proper level of organisation, it may not be appropriate to select dam and sire lines for a subsequent crossbreeding program [52]. An alternative could be the development of multi-purpose lines, through simultaneous selection for litter size and growth traits [27].

In maternal lines, the most common direct criteria used in selection programs is litter size at birth or at weaning (see Table 4). Although, litter size at weaning show a lower heritability than litter size at birth (see Table 2); the majority of maternal lines are selected by litter size at weaning, since this trait reflects both the prolificacy as well as the maternal ability of the doe (Table 4). In some commercial lines, the selection criterium is weight at weaning, a trait relates to the ability of the doe for lactating and nourishing the progeny [56]. The response due to selection in these maternal lines has ranged between 0.05-0.13 kits born alive or weaned per litter and generation [8].

NameCountryOrigenSelection criteriaNumber of generationsReference
INRA2066FranceCalifornian & Giant HimalayanLitter size at birthMore than 34 generations[53]
INRA2666FranceINRA2066 & Line VLitter size at weaningSince 1999[54]
INRA9077FranceNew Zealand White & Bouscat WhiteLitter size at birthSince 1998[55]
INRA1777FranceINRA1077Litter size at birth & individual weaning weightMore than 5 generations[56]
Line ASpainNew Zealand WhiteLitter size at weaningMore than 44 generations[57]
Line VSpainFour specialised maternal linesLitter size at weaningMore than 39 generations[57]
Line HSpainHyperprolific commercial doesLitter size at weaningMore than 22 generations[57]
Line LPSpainLong-lived commercial doesLitter size at weaningMore than 8 generations[57]
Line PRATSpainA closed population with crossbred animalsLitter size at weaningSince 1992[58]
Pannon KaHungaryCrossbreds & Pannon WhiteNumber of kits born aliveSince 1999[59]
APRIEgyptBaladi Red & Line VLitter weight at weaningSince 2002[60]
ITELV2006ArgeliaINRA2666 and local populationLitter size at birth and body weight at 75 daysSince 2003[61]
Uruguay NZWUruguayNew Zealand WhiteLitter size at weaningMore than 5 generations[62]
Uruguay VUruguayLine VLitter size at weaningMore than 5 generations[62]

Table 4.

Maternal lines for meat rabbit production.

In paternal lines, in order to improve feed conversion rate as comment before, the most common direct criteria used in selection programs is postweaning daily gain from weaning to slaughtering. Other selection criteria used in paternal lines are those related to the weight at slaughter (see Table 5). Recently, residual feed intake was investigated experimentally as a direct way to improve the feed conversion rate [44, 45, 48]. The response to selection in paternal lines range between 18 and 35 g/generation for weight at slaughter and between 0.45 and 1.23 g/d generation for daily gain, with positive correlated response on adult weight and feed intake and negative correlated response on feed conversion, dressing percentage and maturity at a fixed weight [8, 48].

NameCountryOrigenSelection criteriaNumber of generationsReference
Line RSpainTwo paternal linesPostweaning daily gainMore than 32 generations[57]
Line CaldesSpainCrossbredsPostweaning daily gainSince 1992[63]
Italian SilverItalyArgenté de ChampagnePostweaning daily gainSince 2000[57]
ALEXEgyptBaladi Black & Line VPostweaning daily gainMore than 7 generations[13]
AltexUSA¼ California & ¼ Giant Himalayan & ½ Flemish GiatIndividual weight at 70 daysSince 1994[15]

Table 5.

Paternal lines for meat rabbit production.

In multi-purpose lines, both growth and reproductive traits are selected (Table 6). Thus, there are lines selected simultaneously by individual weight at slaughter and litter size traits, and by thigh muscle volume (TMV) measured on computer tomography (CT) and litter weight or average daily gain. The problem of selection by TMV is the high costs and the long generation intervals [59].

NameCountryOrigenSelection criteriaNumber of generationsReference
INRA1077FranceNew Zealand White & Bouscat WhiteLitter size at birth & Individual weight at 63 daysMore than 30 generations[64]
Giante de EspañaEspañaFlemish Giant & Lebrel EspañolLitter weight at weaning & growth rate during fatteningSince 1984[65]
Italian New Zealand WhiteItalyNew Zealand WhiteLitter size at 21 days & Individual weight at 60 daysSince 1980[66]
Italian CaliforniaItalyCaliforniaLitter size at 21 days & Individual weight at 60 daysSince 1980[66]
Pannon WhiteHungaryNew Zealand White & CaliforniaLitter weight at 21 days & Thigh muscle volumeSince 2010[59]
Pannon Terminal LHungaryCrossbreds & Pannon WhitePostweaning daily gain & Thigh muscle volumeSince 2005[59]
MoshtohorEgyptSinai Gabali & Line VLitter weight at weaning & individual weight at 56 daysSince 2006[13]
Saudi-3Saudi ArabiaSaudi Gabali & Line VLitter weight at weaning and weight at 84 daysSince 2000[13]
BotucatuBrazilNorfolk lineLitter size at weaning & Postweaning daily gainSince 1998[27]

Table 6.

Multi-purpose line for meat rabbit production.

The oldest program for rabbit breeding and improvement is the French program that was started in 1969 by French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA-SAGA, Toulouse), and followed by the Spanish programs that started in 1976 for the Department of Animal Science at Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV, Valencia) and in 1992 for Rabbit Science Unit at Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA). The INRA-SAGA has developed several maternal lines as INRA2066, INRA2666, INRA1777 and INRA9077, and a synthetic multi-purpose line as INRA1077. In Spain, the UPV and IRTA have created the maternal lines A, V, H, LP and PRAT and the paternal lines R and Caldes. Besides, University of Zaragoza has developed a multi-purpose line Gigante de España [57].

Other selection programs in rabbits have been carried out both inside and outside Europe. For example inside Europe, Kaposvár University in Hungary has developed the maternal line Pannon Ka and multi-purpose lines Pannon White and Pannon Terminal L, and two cooperative centres from Emilia-Romagna in Italy have created the paternal line Italian Silver and the multi-purpose lines Italian New Zealand White and California. Outside Europe, we can found the maternal lines APRI (at the Animal Production Research Institute in Egypt), ITEL2066 (at the Institut Technique de l’Elevage -ITELV- and at Tizi Ouzou University in Algeria), and Uruguay NZW and V (at Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agropecuarias of las Brujas in Uruguay), and the paternal lines ALEX (at Alexandria University in Egypt) and Altex (at Texas A&M University in USA) as well as the multi-purpose lines Moshtohor (at Benha University in Egypt), Saudi-3 (at King Saud University in Saudi Arabia) and Botucatu (at Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia of Botucatu in Brazil). It must note that most of the lines developed outside Europe have had the collaboration of the UPV and INRA-SAGA. Furthermore, the rabbit farmer can also purchase in market animals from the maternal and paternal lines from several private companies, mainly French and Spanish as Eurolap Hyla, Grimaud Frères Sélection, Hycole, Hypharm, and Granja Jordán among others.

Advertisement

5. Selection experiments

New traits are emerging as criterium selection in breeding programs, both maternal lines and parental lines. Accordingly, selection experiments have been carried out in different rabbit populations. Different strategies have been adopted for estimating the genetic progress in these experiments, as the using divergently selected lines or the using a control population. Divergent selection allows us to use each line as control of the other, but estimated response can be biased when response is no symmetry in both lines. Control population provides an unbiased estimate of response to selection since working with non-selected animals from the same population. Selection for ovulation rate, prenatal survival, longevity, feed efficiency, meat quality, uniformity in production, and resistance to Pl digestive disorders has been reviewed in this section.

5.1 Selection for ovulation rate and prenatal survival

Selection for ovulation rate and prenatal survival has been proposed as an indirect approach for increasing litter size since these parameters limit it. In turn, uterine capacity limits prenatal survival, thus its selection has been postulated in order to improve litter size [67]. There has been carried out one selection experiment for ovulation rate [68], two divergent selection experiment for uterine capacity (one in UPV [69] and other in INRA-SAGA [70]), and one two-step selection experiment for ovulation rate and litter size [71]. The estimated response to selection for ovulation rate using a control population was 0.21 ova per generation without any correlated response in litter size, as consequence a reduction in fetal survival [68]. The difference between the divergent lines for uterine capacity showed that selection was effective for uterine capacity and a correlated response was found in embryo survival in the experiment of UPV [72] and in fetal survival in the experiment of INRA-SAGA [70]. An asymmetric correlated response in litter size was reported after 10 generation of selection in UPV experiment using a control population; whereas increasing uterine capacity was not accompanied by a correlated response in litter size, decreasing it reduced litter size by 0.19 kits per generation because of lower embryo and fetal survival [73]. Two-stage selection by ovulation rate and litter size has successful and showed a correlated response in litter size by 0.12 kits per generation [71].

5.2 Selection for longevity

Due partially to negative correlated response to high selection for production on voluntary culling in dam, the longevity has been proposed as new selection objective in breeding programs in rabbits. In this sense, two selection experiments have been performed to improve longevity: one in the UPV and other in the INRA-SAGA. The UPV’s experiment has allowed to create the LP line. This line was founded by selecting females from commercial farms with extremely high number of parturitions (between 25 and 41 parities) and a constraint on prolificacy (from 7.5 to 11.9 young born alive) [74]. Once the LP line was constituted, the selection is being carried out by litter size at weaning and this line is currently in 17th generation. The INRA-SAGA has performed a divergent selection experiment for longevity. The selection criterium was the total number of artificial inseminations after the first parity [75]. Both experiments have showed a favourable correlated response on doe’s body reserves. However, response to longevity has been limited, due to this trait has a small heritability and the time required obtaining pertinent information is long.

5.3 Selection for feed efficiency

Feed efficiency has been traditionally measured as feed conversion rate, i.e., the ratio between feed intake and body weight gain over a fixed range of days. More recently, residual feed intake has emerged as new trait for improving of feed efficiency. However, residual feed intake is no ease to measure, since to require using equations in order to estimate the difference between actual feed intake and expected feed intake according to the requirements for the maintenance and the growth of the animal. Several divergent selection experiments in rabbits for feed conversion rate [76] and residual feed intake [35, 45, 77] have been carried out. The divergent selection experiment of Moura et al. [76] reports a difference between lines, having the high line lower feed conversion rate than the low one at the end of the experiment. The estimated response to selection using mixed model technique was 0.6% per generation. The divergent selection experiment on residual feed intake of Larzul and de Rochambeau [45] only had one generation of selection, nothing can be said about whether selection was successful since the difference between the lines was not significant. The experiment of selection for residual feed intake between 30 and 65 d of age of Drouilhet et al. [35, 77] showed a decreasing in residual feed intake of 0.9% per generation (−39 g), and a correlated response of 0.8% (−0.20 g) in feed conversion rate after nine generations. No correlated response was found for growth rate, showing that selection acted upon reducing appetite [78, 79].

5.4 Selection for quality meat

Intramuscular fat is a main meat quality factor, since affecting sensory properties and the nutritional value of the meat. A divergent selection experiment on intramuscular fat in muscle Longissimus dorsi was carried out by Zomeño et al. [80]. After seven generations of selection, the divergence between lines was around 5% per generation (1.09 g/100 g), with a symmetrical response [81]. There were no correlated responses in pH and in colour and in any sensory attributes [82]. A positive correlated response was found on fat in Biceps femoris, in Supraspinatus and Semimembranosus proprius muscles, and in perirenal fat content, which was greater in the high line [83]. An increase in dissectible fat leads to deterioration in carcass. However, the amount of dissectible fat in rabbit carcasses is low still (2.5% at 9 weeks and 3.5% at 13 weeks, [84]), in order to consider that selection for intramuscular fat can deteriorate carcass in this species.

5.5 Selection for uniformity in production

Uniformity in production is an interesting trait for rabbit industry. Two divergent selection experiments for environmental variability have been carried out one in INRA-SAGA for homogeneity in weight at birth and other in University Miguel Hernández de Elche (UMH) for homogeneity in litter size at birth. The INRA-SAGA’s experiment showed a lower within-litter birth weight standard deviation in the Homogeneous line than in the Heterogenous line after 10 generations (7.34 g vs. 11.26 g [85]). Moreover, the Homogeneous line exhibited higher litter size at weaning and lower mortality at birth and at weaning than the Heterogeneous line. No correlated response was reported for the individual weight at birth or the standard deviation and individual weight at weaning [86]. A higher homogeneity in weight birth within litter was related to higher length and capacity of the uterine horn, thus the divergence between the lines could be at least partly due to their characteristics of the reproductive tract [87]. In the experiment of UMH, after 10 generations of selection, the environmental litter size variance was 2.7 kits2 in the Homogeneous line and 4.4 kits2 in the Heterogeneous line [88]. A low variability in litter size in the Homogeneous line was related to better adaptation to environment with less response to stress and diseases, i.e. with does more resilient [89]. Therefore, decreasing litter size variability can favour the dam’s survival in the farm. Moreover, selection for litter size variability shows a negative response correlated to litter size, i.e., a reduction in litter size variability was accompanied by a larger litter size at birth [88]. A higher litter size in the Homogeneous line was related to a higher number of implanted embryos [90], as consequence a higher embryonic development at early gestation in this line [91, 92].

5.6 Selection for resistance to digestive disorders

A divergent selection experiment to resistance to enteropathies disorders was performed in INRA-SAGA. A binary score based on the observed signs of enteropathy during the growing period was the selection criterion. The resistance animals showed similar mortality and growth rate to those of sensitivity animals, but cumulative mortality was lower in resistant than sensitivity animals, when animals were inoculated with an enteropathogenic E. coli 0103 strain [93].

Advertisement

6. Conclusions

Traditionally, rabbit commercial schemes have based on development of specialised lines to improve prolificacy (maternal lines) and to improve growth rate (paternal line). However, not all countries have a proper level organisation, being an alternative the development of multi-purpose lines for litter size and growth. Universities and public research centers have played a leading role in the development of these lines. Litter size and growth rate have traditionally been the selection criteria in the selection schemes for these lines. Recently, others functional traits are emerging strongly as selection criteria in breeding programs such as ovulation rate, prenatal survival, longevity, feed efficiency, meat quality, uniformity in production, and resistance to digestive disorders.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The Project AGL2017-86083-C2-2-P funding by FEDER/Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación-Agencia Estatal de Investigación and the Project AICO/2019/169 funding by Valencia Regional Government have allow to conduct this chapter.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1. FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [Internet]. 2020. Available from: http://www.fao.org/faostat [Accessed: 2020-05-07]
  2. 2. Armero Q, Blasco A. Economic weights for rabbit selection indices. Journal Applied Rabbit Research. 1992;15:637-642.
  3. 3. Cartuche L, Pascual M, Gómez EA, Blasco A. Economic weights in rabbit meat production. World Rabbit Science. 2014;22:165–177. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2014.1747
  4. 4. Prayaga KC, Eady S. Rabbit farming for meat production in Australia: preliminary estimates of economic values for production traits. Asian-Australian Journal Animal Science. 2000;13: 357–359
  5. 5. Eady SJ, Garreau H. An enterprise gross margin model to explore the influence of selection criteria for breeding programs and changes to management systems. In Proceedings of 9th World Rabbit Congress. 10-13 June; Verona, Italy; 2008. p. 61-66
  6. 6. Piles M, Gómez EA, Rafel O, Ramon J, Blasco A. Elliptical selection experiment for the estimation of genetic parameters of the growth rate and feed conversion ratio in rabbits. Journal of Animal Science. 2004;82:654-660. DOI: 10.2527/2004.823654x
  7. 7. Baselga M, Blasco A. Mejora genética del conejo de producción de carne. Ed. Mundi Prensa, 1989. Madrid, Spain
  8. 8. Baselga M. Genetic improvement of meat rabbits. Programmes and diffusion. In Proceeding of 8th World Rabbit Congress. 7-10 Septembre; Puebla, Mexico. 2004. p. 1-13
  9. 9. Lebas F, Coudert P, Rochambeau H, Thébault RG. The rabbit: husbandry, health and production. FAO Animal Production and Health Series No. 21. Rome, FAO [Internet]. 1997. Available from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/t1690e/t1690e00.HTM [Accessed: 2020-05-07]
  10. 10. Piles M, García ML, Rafel O, Ramon J, Baselga M. Genetics of litter size in three maternal lines of rabbits: repeatability versus multiple-trait models. Journal of Animal Science 2006;84(9):2309–2315. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2005-622
  11. 11. Ragab M., Baselga M. A comparison of reproductive traits of four maternal lines of rabbits selected for litter size at weaning and founded on different criteria. Livestock Science 2011;136:201–206. DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2010.09.009
  12. 12. Khalil MH, Al-Saef AM. Methods, criteria, techniques and genetic responses for rabbit selection: A review. In Proceeding of 9th World Rabbit Congress. 10-13 June; Verona, Italy; 2008. p. 1–22
  13. 13. Khalil MH, Bolet G. Sustainable Rabbit Breeding and Genetic Improvement Programs Achieved in Developing Countries. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production. Leipzig, Germany. 2010. p. 0962
  14. 14. Rochambeau H de, de la Fuente LF, Rouvier R, Ouhayoun J. Sélection sur la vitesse de croissance post-sevrage chez le lapin. Genetic Selection Evololution 1989; 21:527–546. DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-21-4-527
  15. 15. Lukefahr SD, Odi HB, Atakora JKA. Mass selection for 70-day body weight in rabbits. Journal of Animal Science. 1996;74:1481–1489. DOI: 10.2527/1996.7471481X
  16. 16. Piles M, Blasco A. Response to selection for growth rate in rabbits. World Rabbit Science. 2003;11(2):53–62. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2003.497
  17. 17. Larzul C, Gondret F, Combes S, Rochambeau H de. Divergent selection on 63- day body weight in the rabbit: response on growth, carcass and muscle traits. Genetic Selection Evolution. 2005;37:105–122. DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-37-1-105
  18. 18. Ayyat MS, Marai IFM, El-Sayiad GhA. Genetic and non-genetic factors affecting milk production and preweaning litter traits of New Zealand white does under Egyptian conditions. World Rabbit Science. 1995;3(3):119-124. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.1995.250.
  19. 19. Badawy AY, Peiró R, Blasco A, Santacreu MA. Correlated responses on litter size traits and survival traits after two-stage selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits. Animal. 2019;3(3):453–459. DOI: 10.1017/S1751731118002033
  20. 20. Blasco, A., Martínez-Álvaro, M., García, M. Ibañez-Escriche N., Argent MJ. Selection for environmental variance of litter size in rabbits. Genetic Selection Evolution. 2017;49:48. DOI: 10.1186/s12711-017-0323-4
  21. 21. El Nagar AGF. Genetic analysis of longevity in specialized lines of rabbits. [tesis]. Universidad Politècnica de València; 2015. DOI: 10.4995/Thesis/10251/52390
  22. 22. Fernández EN, Sánchez JP, Martínez R, Legarra A, Baselga M. Role of inbreeding depression, non-inbred dominance deviations and random year-season effect in genetic trends for prolificacy in closed rabbit lines. Journal Animal Breeding and Genetic. 2017;134(6):441-452. DOI: 10.1111/jbg.12284
  23. 23. García ML, Baselga M. Genetic response to selection for reproductive performance in maternal line of rabbits. World Rabbit Science. 2002;10(2):71-76. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2002.478
  24. 24. Ezzeroug R, Belabbas R, Argente MJ, Berbar A, Diss S, Boudjella Z, Talaziza D, Boudahdir N, Garcia ML. 2020. Genetic correlations for reproductive and growth traits in rabbits. Canadian Journal of Animal Science. 2020. DOI: 10.1139/CJAS-2019-0049
  25. 25. Gyovai P, Nagy I, Radnai I, Németh EB, Szendrő ZS. Heritability and genetic trends of number of kits born alive in a synthetic maternal rabbit line. Italian Journal Animal Science 2009;8(3):110-112. DOI: 10.4081/ijas.2009.s3.110
  26. 26. Lukefahr SD, Hamilton HH. Heritability and repeatability estimates of maternal performance traits in purebred and crossbred does. World Rabbit Science. 1997; 5(3): 99-105. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.1997.326
  27. 27. Moura ASMT, Costa ARC, Polastre R. Variance component and response to selection for reproductive, litter and growth traits through a multi-purpose index. World Rabbit Science. 2001;9:77-86. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2001.449
  28. 28. Nagy I, Farkas J, Curik I, Gorjanc G, Gyovai P, Szendrő Z. Estimation of additive and dominance variance for litter size components in rabbits. Czech Journal of Animal Science. 2014;59:182-189. DOI: 10.17221/7342-CJAS.
  29. 29. Nguyen TN, Farkas J, Szendrõ Z, Nagy I. Genetic evaluation of litter size traits in Pannon Large rabbits. Animal Science Papers and Reports. 2017; 35(2):181-192.
  30. 30. Nguyen TN, Farkas J, Szendrõ Z, Nagy I. Genetic Evaluation of Litter Size Traits in Pannon White Rabbits. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus. 2017;82 (1):63-67.
  31. 31. Rastogi RK, Lukefahr SD, Lauckner FD. Maternal heritability and repeatability for litter traits in rabbits in a humid tropical environment. Livestock Production Science. 2000;67:123-128. DOI: 10.1016/S0301-6226(00)00180-9r
  32. 32. Sorensen P, Kjaer JB, Brenoe UT, Su G. Estimates of genetic parameters in Danish White rabbits using an animal model: II. Litter traits. World Rabbit Science. 2001;9(1):33-38. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2001.444
  33. 33. Gomez EA, Rafel O, Ramon J. Genetic relationship between growth and litter size in traits at first parity in a specialised dam line in rabbits. In Proceeding of 6th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production. 11-16 January, Armidale, Australia. 1998. p. 552-555
  34. 34. Anous MR. Correlated response of meatiness indicating traits to selection for weight at prevailing marketing age in New Zealand White rabbits. Archiv fur Geflugelkunde. 1999;63:225-228
  35. 35. Drouilhet, H Gilbert, E Balmisse, J Ruesche, A Tircazes, C Larzul, H Garreau. Genetic parameters for two selection criteria for feed efficiency in rabbits. Journal Animal Science. 2013;91(7):3121–3128. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2012-6176
  36. 36. Estany J, Camacho J, Baselga M, Blasco A. Selection response of growth rate in rabbit for meat production. Genetic Selection Evolution. 1992;24:527-237. DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-24-6-527
  37. 37. Garreau H, Szendrõ Zs, Larzul C, Rochambeau H. de. Genetic parameters and genetic trends of growth and litter size traits in the White Pannon breed. In Proceeding of 7th World Rabbit Congress, 4-7 July, Valence, Spain. 2000. p. 403-408.
  38. 38. Gyovai P, Nagy I, Gerencsér Z, Metzger S, Radnai I, Szendrõ Z. Genetic parameters and trends of the thigh muscle volume in Pannon White rabbits. In Proceeding of 9th World Rabbit Congress. 10-13 June. Verona, Italy. 2008. p. 115-119
  39. 39. Niranjan SK, Sharma SR, Gowane GR. Estimates of Direct and Maternal Effects on Growth Traits in Angora Rabbits. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2010; 23(8):981-986. DOI: 10.5713/ajas.2010.90549
  40. 40. Peiró R, Badawy AY, Blasco A, Santacreu MA. Correlated responses on growth traits after two-stage selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits. Animal. 2019;13(11):2457–2462. DOI: 10.1017/S1751731119001423
  41. 41. Piles M, Sánchez JP. Use of group records of feed intake to select for feed efficiency in rabbit. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetic. 2019;136:475-483. DOI: 10.1111/jbg.12395
  42. 42. Su G, Kjaer JB, Brenøe UT, Sørensen P. Estimates of genetic parameters in Danish white rabbits using an animal model: I. Growth and carcass traits. World Rabbit Science. 1999;7:59-64. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.1999.381
  43. 43. Sakthivel M, Balasubramayam D, Kumarasamy P, Gopin H, Raja A, Anilkumar R, Devaki A. Estimates of (co)variance components and genetic parameters for body weights and growth efficiency traits in the New Zealand white rabbit. World Rabbit Science. 2017;25(4):329-338. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2017.7057
  44. 44. Garreau H, David I, Hurtaud J, Drouilhet L, Gilbert H. Parameters for growth and feed efficiency traits in two commercial lines. In Proceeding of 10th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 17-22 August, Vancouver, Canada. 2014. p. 565-567
  45. 45. Larzul C, Rochambeau H. de. Selection for residual feed consumption in the rabbit. Livestock Production Science. 2005;95(1-2):67-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.12.007
  46. 46. Blasco A, Nagy I, Hernández P. Genetics of growth and meat quality in rabbits. Meat Science. 2018;145:178-185. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.06.030
  47. 47. Johnson ZB, Harris DJ, Brown CJ, Robert WRG, Harrold RL. Genetic Analysis of Litter Size, Mortality and Growth Traits of New Zealand White Rabbits. The Professional Animal Scientist. 1988;4(2):11-16. DOI: 10.15232/S1080-7446(15)32340-8
  48. 48. Rochambeau H de, Bolet G, Tudela F. Long-term selection. Comparison of two rabbit strains. In Proceeding of 5th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 7-12 August, Guelph, Canada. 1994. p. 257–260
  49. 49. Bole G. Problèmes liés à l’accroissement de la productivité chez la lapine reproductrice. INRA. Productions Animales 1998; 11(3): 235-238
  50. 50. Argente MJ. Major components in limiting litter size. In: Payan-Carreira R, editor. Insights from animal reproduction. London, UK: InTech; 2016. p. 87-114. DOI: 10.5772/62280
  51. 51. Gómez EA, Baselga M, Rafel O, García ML, Ramón J. Selection, diffusion and performances of six Spanish lines of meat rabbit. In Testik A, Baselga M. editors. 2. International Conference on Rabbit Production in Hot Climates. Zaragoza, Spain: CIHEAM, 1999. p. 147-152
  52. 52. Garreau H, Piles M, Larzul C, Baselga M, Rochambeau H. de. Selection of maternal lines: last results and prospects. In Proceeding of 8th World Rabbit Congress. 7-10 September, Puebla, Mexico. 2004. p. 4-25
  53. 53. Bolet G, Saleil G. Strain INRA2066 (France). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 121-124
  54. 54. Bolet G, Saleil G. Strain INRA2666 (France). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 135-137
  55. 55. Bolet G, Saleil G. Strain INRA9077 (France). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 129-131
  56. 56. Garreau H, Rochambeau H de. La sélection des qualités maternelles pour la croissance du laperau. In Proceeding of 10èmes Journées Recherche Cunicole, November, Paris, France. 2003. p. 61-64
  57. 57. Baselga M, Ragab M, Mínguez C, El Nagar A.G. Analysis of methods to found new rabbit lines. Egyptian Journal of Rabbit Science. 2017;27(2):155-169.
  58. 58. Gómez EA, Rafel O, Ramón J. The Prat Strain (Spain). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 203-208
  59. 59. Matics ZS, Nagy I, Gerencsér ZS, Randai I, Gyovai P, Donkó T, Dalle Zotte A, Curik I, Szendro ZS. Pannon breeding program in rabbit at Kaposvár University. World Rabbit Science. 2014;22:287-300. DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2014.1511
  60. 60. Abou Khadiga GY, Youssef MK, Baselga M. Characterization of reproductive performance of the APRI line of rabbits. In Proceeding of 10th World Rabbit Congress, 3-6 September. Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. 2012. p. 743-747
  61. 61. Bolet G, Zerrouki N, Gacem M, Brun JM, Lebas F. Genetic parameters and trends for litter and growth traits in a synthetic line of rabbits. In proceedings 10th World Rabbit Congress, 3-6 September, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. 2012. p. 195-199
  62. 62. Capra G, Blumetto O, Elizalde E. Meat rabbit production in Uruguay. In Proceeding of 7th World Rabbit Congress, 7-10 July, Valencia, Spain. 2000. p. 51-58
  63. 63. Gómez EA, Rafel O, Ramón J. The Caldes Strain (Spain). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 193-198
  64. 64. Bolet G, Saleil G. Strain INRA1077 (France). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 113-116
  65. 65. Lopéz M, Sierra I. The Gigante de España Breed (Spain). Khalil MH, Baselga M. editors. In Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 38). 2002. p. 213-220
  66. 66. Randi E, Scossiroli RE. Genetic analysis of production traits in Italian new Zealand White and California pure-bred population. Genet Selection Evolution. 1980;12:296. DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-12-3-296
  67. 67. Argente MJ, Santacreu MA, Climent A, Blasco A. Relationships between uterine and fetal traits in rabbits selected on uterine capacity. Journal of Animal Science. 2003; 81(5):1265-1273. DOI: 10.2527/2003.815265x
  68. 68. Laborda P, Santacreu MA, Blasco A, Mocé ML. Selection for ovulation rate in rabbits: direct and correlated responses estimated with a cryopreserved control population. Journal of Animal Science. 2012;90(10):3392–3397. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2011-4837
  69. 69. Blasco A, Ortega JA, Climent A, Santacreu MA. Divergent selection for uterine capacity in rabbits. I. Genetic parameters and response to selection. Journal of Animal Science. 2005;83(10):2297–2302. DOI: 10.2527/2005.8310229x
  70. 70. Bolet G, Santacreu MA, Argente MA, Climent A, Blasco A. Divergent selection for uterine efficiency in unilaterally ovariectomized rabbits. I. Phenotypic and genetic parameters. In Proceeding 5th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Guelph, Canada. 1994.p. 261-264
  71. 71. Badawy AY, Peiró R, Blasco A, Santacreu, MA. Correlated responses on litter traits and survival traits after two-stage selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits. Animal. 2019; 13: 453–459. DOI: 10.1017S175173111800233
  72. 72. Argente MJ, Santacreu MA, Climent A, Bolet G, Blasco A. Divergent selection for uterine capacity in rabbits. Journal of Animal Science. 1997;75(9):2350-2354. doi:10.2527/1997.7592350x
  73. 73. Santacreu MA, Mocé ML, Climent A, Blasco A. Divergent selection for uterine capacity in rabbits. II. Correlated response in litter size and its components estimated with a cryopreserved control population. Journal of Animal Science. 2005;83(10):2303-2307. doi:10.2527/2005.83102303x
  74. 74. Sánchez JP, Theilgaard P, Mínguez C. Baselga M. Constitution and evolution of a long-lived productive rabbit line. Journal of Animal Science. 2008;86:515-525. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2007-0217
  75. 75. Larzul C, Ducrocq V, Tudela F, Juin H, Garreau H. The length of productive life can be modified through selection: an experimental demonstration in the rabbit. Journal of Animal Science. 2014;92: 2395-2401. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2013-7216
  76. 76. Moura A, Kaps M, Vogt DW, Lamberson WR. Two-way selection for daily gain and feed conversion in a composite rabbit population. Journal of Animal Science. 1997;75:2344–2349. DOI: 10.2527/1997.7592344x
  77. 77. Drouilhet L, Achard CS, Zemb O, Molette C, Gidenne T, Larzul C, Rousche J, Tircazes A, Segura M, Bouchez T, Theau-Clément M, Joly T, Balmisse E, Garreau H, Gilbert H. Direct and correlated responses to selection in two lines of rabbits selected for feed efficiency under ad libitum and restricted feeding: I. Production traits and gut microbiota characteristics. Journal of Animal Science. 2016;94,38–48. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2015-9402
  78. 78. Garreau H, Gilbert H, Molette C, Larzul C, Balmisse E, Ruesche J, Secula-Tircazes A, Gidenne T, Drouilhet, L. Réponses à la sélection pour deux critères d'efficacité alimentaire chez le lapin. 1. Croissance, ingéré et efficacité alimentaire. In Proceeding of 16èmes Journées de la Recherche Cunicole, Le Mans, France. 2015. p. 161–164.
  79. 79. Garreau H, Gilbert H, Molette C, Larzul C, Balmisse E, Ruesche J, Secula-Tircazes A. Direct and correlated responses to selection in two lines of rabbits selected for feed efficiency under ad libitum and restricted feeding. In Proceedings of 11th World Rabbit Congress, Qingdao. China. 2016. p. 43-4
  80. 80. Zomeño C, Hernández P, Blasco, A. Divergent selection for intramuscular fat content in rabbits. I. Direct response to selection. Journal of Animal Science. 2013;91:4526–4531. DOI: 10.2527/jas2013-6361
  81. 81. Martínez-Álvaro M, Hernández P, Blasco, A. Divergent selection on intramuscular fat in rabbits: Responses to selection and genetic parameters. Journal of Animal Science. 2016;94:4993–5003. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2016-0590
  82. 82. Martínez-Álvaro M, Penalba V, Hernández P, Blasco, A. Effect of divergent selection for intramuscular fat on sensory traits and instrumental texture in rabbit meat. Journal of Animal Science. 2016;94:5137–5143. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2016-0850
  83. 83. Martínez-Álvaro M, Blasco A, Agha S, Hernández P. Correlated responses to selection for intramuscular fat in several muscles in rabbits. Meat Science. 2018; 139:187-192. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.01.026
  84. 84. Hernández P, Aliaga S, Pla M, Blasco A. The effect of selection for growth rate and slaughter age on carcass composition and meat quality traits in rabbits. Journal of Animal Science. 2004;82:3138–3143. DOI: 10.2527/2004.82113138x
  85. 85. Bodin L, Garcia M, Saleil G, Bolet G, Garreau H. Results of 10 generations of canalising selection for rabbit birth weight. In Proceeding of 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, August, Leipzig, Germany. 2010. p. 0391
  86. 86. Garreau H, Bolet G, Larzul C, Robert-Granié C, Saleil G, San Cristobal M, Bodin L. Results of four generations of a canalising selection for rabbit birth weight. Livestock Science. 2008;119:55-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2008.02.009
  87. 87. Bolet G, Garreau H, Joly T, Theau-Clement M, Falieres J, Hurtaud J, Bodin L. Genetic homogenisation of birth weight in rabbits: Indirect selection response for uterine horn characteristics. Livestock Science. 2007;111:28-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2006.11.012
  88. 88. Blasco A, Martínez-Álvaro M, García ML, Ibáñez-Escriche N, Argente MJ. Selection for genetic environmental sensitivity of litter size in rabbits. Genetic Selection Evolution. 2017;49:48-55. DOI: 10.1186/s12711-017-0323-4
  89. 89. Argente MJ, García ML, Zbyňovská K, Petruška P, Capcarová M, Blasco A. Correlated response to selection for litter size environmental variability in rabbits´ resilience. Animal. 2019;13:2348-2355 DOI: 10.1017/S1751731119000302
  90. 90. Argente MJ, Calle EW, García ML Blasco A. Correlated response in litter size components in rabbits selected for litter size variability. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetic. 2017;134:505-511 DOI: 10.1111/jbg.12283
  91. 91. García ML, Blasco A, Argente MJ. Embryologic changes in rabbit lines selected for litter size variability. Theriogenology. 2016;86:1247-1250 DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.04.065
  92. 92. Calle EW, García ML, Blasco A, Argente MJ. Correlated response in early embryonic development in rabbits selected for litter size variability. World Rabbit Science. 2017;25:323-327 DOI: 10.4995/wrs.2017.6340
  93. 93. Garreau H, Brard S, Hurtaud J, Guitton E, Cauquil L, Licois D, Schwartz B, Combes S, Gidenne T. Divergent selection for digestive disorders in two commercial Echerichia coli 0-103. In Proceeding of 10th World Rabbit Congress, September, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. 2012. p. 153-157

Written By

María-Luz García and María-José Argente

Submitted: 18 March 2020 Reviewed: 04 September 2020 Published: 30 September 2020