DOI: 10.4995/thesis/10251/52390
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic analysis of longevity in specialized lines of rabbits

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The reported responses for LPL in the studied maternal lines are most likely associated, as previously indicated, directly to an unintended selection for longevity and not to a correlated response associated to the selection for criteria considered in each line. We proposed this idea because EL Nagar (2015) reported that, in the maternal lines under study, the genetic correlation between longevity and prolificacy traits (the selection criteria) were nearly null. In that study, the genetic correlation estimates between LPL and NBA were 0.01 (0.01), 0.01 (0.01), 0.16 (0.20), 0.09 (0.02) and −0.12 (0.33) for A, V, H, LP and R lines, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reported responses for LPL in the studied maternal lines are most likely associated, as previously indicated, directly to an unintended selection for longevity and not to a correlated response associated to the selection for criteria considered in each line. We proposed this idea because EL Nagar (2015) reported that, in the maternal lines under study, the genetic correlation between longevity and prolificacy traits (the selection criteria) were nearly null. In that study, the genetic correlation estimates between LPL and NBA were 0.01 (0.01), 0.01 (0.01), 0.16 (0.20), 0.09 (0.02) and −0.12 (0.33) for A, V, H, LP and R lines, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2008) reported that the mean of the relative risk between L and V lines was 0.80 (exp (−0.22)), which indicated that it was 1.24 times more likely for a V doe to be culled or to die than for an L doe. Moreover, the relative risks between V and L lines at their foundation and in present generations were reported to be 1.55 and 1.56, respectively, always in favour of L line (EL Nagar, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%