{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04467049977885891, 'fraction_numerical': 0.06059265811587793, 'mean_word_length': 4.860103626943006, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Genetic parameters of fertility in two lines of rabbits with different reproductive potential.

A Bayesian analysis with a threshold model was performed for fertility defined as a binary trait (1 = successful mating, 0 = unsuccessful mating) in two populations of rabbits of different reproductive potential and different genetic origin: Line P selected for litter size and Line C selected for growth rate. There were 20,793 records of natural mating (86.2% successful) in Line C between 1983 and 2003, and 17,548 records (80.5% successful) in Line P, between 1992 and 2003. Data related to 5,388 and 3,848 females and 1,021 and 685 males in Lines C and P, respectively. The pedigree included 6,409 and 4,533 individuals in Lines C and P, respectively. The binary response was modeled under a probit approach. The model for the latent variable included male and female additive genetic effects, male and female permanent environmental effects, and the year-season and physiological status of the female (nulliparous, multiparous lactating, or multiparous nonlactating) as systematic effects. Means (standard deviation in parentheses) of the estimated marginal posterior distribution (EMPD) of male heritability were 0.013 (0.006) and 0.010 (0.008) in Lines C and P, respectively, and those of EMPD of female heritability were 0.056 (0.013) and 0.062 (0.018) in Lines C and P, respectively. Means of the EMPD of the proportion of the phenotypic variance due to environmental male and female effects were, respectively, 0.031 (0.007) and 0.128 (0.018) in Line C and 0.053 (0.010) and 0.231 (0.024) in Line P. Means (standard deviations in parentheses) of the EMPD of genetic correlation between male and female fertility were 0.733 (0.197) in Line C and 0.434 (0.381) in Line P. The posterior distribution of genetic correlations presents a huge dispersion, and the estimates should be taken with caution because of the almost negligible estimate of the male genetic component. Results indicate that little genetic variation exists for female fertility, and practically none for male fertility. It would, therefore, be possible to improve reproductive performance by including female fertility in a breeding program, but response to selection would be very small.