---

The research was conducted on the basis of an experimental rabbit farm of the Cherkasy Experimental Station of Bioresources of the National Academy of Sciences. The farm uses the technology of intensive production of rabbit meat.

For the experiment on determining the fattening and meat indicators of young rabbits obtained from different combinations, 7 groups of young rabbits with 15 heads each aged 28 days were formed by the method of pairs-analogues.

It was found that young rabbits of the first control group (RSH) at 90 daily age had a live weight of 2710 g  they were significantly (p<0.01) dominated by analogues of the second Group (3\4 RSH1\4NB) at 163g, the third (1\4NB3\4RSH) at 120g(p<0.05), the sixth (2\4RSH 1\4NB1\4SV) at 200g(p<0.001), seventh (1\4NB1\4SV2\4RSH) at 179g(p<0.01), which is an increase in the indicator – the mass of one head at 90 daily age.

The indicator of average daily increments(age period 28-90 days) ) in young rabbits of the 2nd group of Origin 3\4RSH1\4NB significantly (p<0.01) prevailed over the control of purebred young rabbits of the Soviet Chinchilla by 2.4 g. the average daily increments in the sixth and seventh experimental groups were 38.3 and 38.0 g, which is 2.6; and 2.3 g significantly higher (p<0.01; p<0.05) from peers of the first group.

In terms of loin width, rabbits of the 6th and 7th groups of young rabbits of the first control group significantly prevailed (p<0.05). The meat content index of these groups of Origin: 2/4 RSH 1/4NB1/4SV; 1/4NB1/4SV2/4RSH, was 6.14; 6.07cm.

Slaughter yield was better in young rabbits of the sixth and seventh groups of Origin 2/4 RSH 1/4NB1/4SV; 1/4NB1/4SV 2/4RSH, which prevailed in the control group by 3.33 and 2.23%.

Feed costs per 1 kg of growth in the groups were: 4.4 kg in the control group; in the experimental groups, the feed efficiency was higher and ranged from 4.1 to 3.9 kg. The group of young rabbits of Origin 2/4RSH1/4NB1/4SV consumed food more efficiently and outnumbered the peers of the Soviet Chinchilla by 500 g, and the 2nd by 300 g and the 7th by 450 g.

The Comprehensive Assessment Index (PKO) was higher in all experimental groups of young rabbits compared to the control, in particular, in groups 2, 3, 6 and 7 by 14.3; 8.7; 17.9 and 15.6 to purebred peers of Group 1 of the Soviet Chinchilla (240.1).

The selection assessment of our tests was given by the index of total heterosis. The index of total heterosis by Slaughter yield of young rabbit carcasses in the experimental groups was: 2,37; 1,76; 1,88; 2,51; 6,64; 4,45%. The index of total heterosis in terms of PKO was 5,95; 3,62; 2,46; 3,04; 7,46; 6,5 %.

Net income for the production of 1 kg of rabbit meat was by Group 1- 10,9; 2-15,6; 3, 4 and 5-14,0; 6-18,7; 7-17,9 due to the inter – breed combination, it increased by 3.1-7.8 UAH.

The highest profitability of production, in terms of direct costs, was among young rabbits of Group 2 – 24.2; groups 6 and 7 – 30.5%; 28.8%. Animals of these groups by origin were two breeds – 3/4rsh1/4nb and three breed crossbreeds: 2/4RSH1/4NB1/4SV; 1/4NB 1/4SV2/4 RSH.

 

References

Badawy, A., Peiró, R, Blasco, A, Santacreu, M. (2019). Correlated responses on litter size traits and survival traits after two-stage selection for ovulation rate and litter size in rabbits. Animal, 3(3):453 – 459. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118002033

Christensen, O., Lund, M. (2010). Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genet. Sel. Evol, 42:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-42-2

Clark, S., van der Werf, J. (2013). Genomic best linear unbiased prediction (gBLUP) for the estimation of genomic breeding values. Methods Mol Biol., 1019, 321-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-447-0_13.

Clasen, J., Fikse, W., Su, G., Karaman, E. (2023). Multibreed genomic prediction using summary statistics and a breed-origin-of-alleles approach. Heredity. 131. 33 – 42. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41437-023-00619-4

Crovato, S., Pinto, A., Martino, G., Mascarello, G., Rizzoli, V., Marcolin, S., Ravarotto, L. (2022). Purchasing habits, sustainability perceptions, and welfare concerns of Italian consumers regarding rabbit meat. Foods, 11(9), 1205. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091205

Dorian, Garrick, Jack, Dekkers, Rohan, Fernando, (2014). The evolution ofmethodologies for genomic prediction. Livestock Science. 166, 10-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2014.05.031.

García, M., Argente, M. (2020). The genetic improvement in meat rabbits. In Lagomorpha Charact. Intech Open: London, 5, 1 – 18. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93896

Havrysh, O., Nebylytsia, M., Tkach, E., Osokina, Т., Bashhenko, V., Bilan, A.  (2025). Reproductive qualities of rabbits depending on paratypic factors during their maintenance. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats «Efektyvne krolivnytstvo i zvirivnytstvo», 11, 7 – 19. https://doi.org/10.37617/2708-0617.2025.11.7-18.

Knecht, D., Srodon, S., Duziński, K. (2015). Breed on selected reproductive eper formance parameters of sows. Arch. Anim. Breed, issue 58, pp. 49–56.

Luchyn, I. S/ (2022). Selection justification of the technology of intensive production of rabbit meat. Animal Husbandry of the Steppe of Ukraine, 1 (2), 171 – 179. https://doi.org/10.31867/2786-6750.

Luchyn, I., Perih, D., Lunyk, Y., Smyrnov, V., Tsyupka, S., Kalamitra, V. (2025). Reproductive traits of chinshilla rabbits under different three-breed crossbreeding schemes. Scientific and Technical Bulletin оf State Scientific Research Control Institute of Veterinary Medical Products and Fodder Additivesаnd Institute of Animal Biology, 26(1), 118-126. https://doi.org/10.36359/scivp.2025-26-1.14

Mondin, C., Trestini, S., Trocino, A., Di Martino, G. (2021). The economics of rabbit farming: a pilot study on the impact of different housing systems. Animals 11, 30-40. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113040

Mrode, R. A. (2005). Thompson, R. Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values. 2nd ed., Wallingford, U. K: CABI Publishing. http://www.cabi.org/cabebooks/ebook/20053196805

Peiró, R., Herrler, A., Santacreu, M.A. (2010). Expression of progesterone receptor related to the polymorphism in the gene in the rabbit reproductive tract. J. Anim. Sci. 88(2), 421 – 427. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-1955.

Piotrovych, N.A. (2017). Formation of reproductive quality of sows and assessment of their combinatory ability. Author’s abstract of the dissertation of the candidate of agricultural sciences.

Shah, Ali, Goswami, Naqash. (2024). Enhancing Rabbit Farming Efficiency with Integrated Genomics and Nutritional Strategies. Frontiers in Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2024.1514923

Shevchenko E., Honchar О., DzitsiukV. (2025).Genetic potential of Poltava silver rabbits: G-BLUP evaluation based on polymorphism of MSTN and PGR genes. Collection of scientific papers «Effective rabbit breeding and animal fur husbandry», 11, 19 – 28. https://doi.org/10.37617/2708-0617.2025.11.19-27.

Shevchenko, E., Honchar, О. (2020). Selection-genetic characteristics of rabbits poltavska silver breed by polymorphism of progesterone receptor gene. Collection of scientific papers «Effective rabbit breeding and animal fur husbandry», 6, 6–13. https://doi.org/10.37617/2708-0617.2020.6.6-13

Siddiqui, S., Gerini, F., Ikram, A., Saeed, F., Feng, X., Chen, Y. (2023). Rabbit Meat – Production, Consumption and Consumers’ Attitudes and Behavior. Sustainability, 15(3), 2008. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032008

Sotnichenko, Yu. (2020). Osoblyvosti formuvannia miasnoi produktyvnosti zamiaso-shkirnymy prohramamy produktyvnosti. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats «Efektyvne krolivnytstvo i zvirivnytstvo». 6, 117 – 128. https://doi.org/10.37617/2708-0617.2020.6.117-125

Tabet, J.M., Lourenco, D., Bussiman F.et al. (2025). All-breed single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor evaluations for fertility traits in US dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 108, 694-706. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-25281.

Vintoniv, O., Havrysh, O. (2022). Reproduktyvna zdatnist krolykiv-samtsiv zalezhno vid vplyvu paratypovykh ta henotypovykh faktoriv. Rozvedennia tvaryn i henetyka, 64, 147 – 153. https://doi.org/10.31073/abg.64.13.