ArticleJournal of animal science2026
Maternal microbiota in relation to mortality, culling, and offspring survival in rabbits.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2026. 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.
- A rabbit is not a mouse: a framework for the initial welfare assessment and long-term monitoring of genetically altered laboratory rabbits.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mortality and culling in rabbits, particularly among breeding does and their offspring, present significant challenges by reducing longevity, productivity, and profitability. This study investigates whether fecal microbiota composition varies depending on whether the female will experience death, culling, or remain healthy and how it correlates with the proximity of the event. Additionally, it examines whether disruptions in the maternal microbiota, transferred naturally to offspring, is associated with their survival. To do so, does were categorized based on their fate: death (D, deceased naturally during productive lifespan), culled for reproductive reasons (CR), or healthy controls (C). Soft fecal samples were collected for V3-V4 16S rRNA sequencing to assess microbial diversity and composition. The results revealed that does approaching death or reproductive culling exhibited lower microbial richness, particularly near the event, with significantly higher values observed in the control group compared to the CR and D groups. Classification models using metataxonomic ASVs data accurately classified fate outcomes, with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.99 when samples were collected close to the event (∼50 d). The deceased group had the highest recall rates (0.80-0.99), suggesting that their microbiota profiles are the most distinct, potentially because of dysbiosis. However, performance decreased as time to the event increased. Concerning offspring survival, first, we found that maternal fate significantly impacted kit survival, with offspring from deceased does showing a 9% lower survival rate at weaning and those from reproductive culls showing a 5% reduction. Additionally, maternal microbiota composition has accounted for a significant portion of the variability in kit survival. Different taxa were found to influence both maternal fate and kit survival, such as Clostridia UCG-014, Ruminococcus, Christensenellaceae R-7 group, and uncultured Eubacteriaceae. These findings highlight the potential of microbiota-based biomarkers for predicting mortality and reproductive culling risks in rabbits, improving management practices, and enhancing offspring survival. Furthermore, the results emphasize the critical link between maternal health, microbiota composition, and offspring survival, underscoring the importance of maintaining maternal microbiota stability for improving both welfare and productivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.