A large proportion of conservation-based studies place most of the emphasis on understanding the dynamics of breeding individuals and most management effort is directed towards them.
There is the potential to use these diversity indices to aid species conservation programs by selecting the most heterozygous individuals for release into the wild or breeding individuals to maximize heterozygosity [ 13].
Some estimates suggest that there are fewer than 2,500 mature breeding individuals, with no subpopulation containing more than 250 mature breeding individuals.
First, breeding individuals contribute disproportionately to sustaining the population compared to non-breeding individuals [6], [12].
BBS surveys, which are conducted at the height of the breeding season (June), were assumed to represent breeding individuals.
Most post-breeding individuals avoided edges, and instead heavily used the clearcut interiors.
However, it might be difficult and expensive to collect phenotypes and genotypes on CB individuals, whereas most breeding programs have routine phenotyping measurement and genotyping of nucleus animals in the pure lines.
Since commercial crossbred animals are usually not individually identified and individual performances are not recorded, it might be difficult and expensive to collect phenotype and genotype data on crossbred individuals, whereas most breeding programs have routine phenotyping and genotyping of nucleus animals in the pure lines.
In most cases, individuals breeding in colder locations built nests that were larger and made of materials that provided better insulation against cold temperatures [14], [17], [18].
In order to illustrate the efficiency of the chosen limit, we did not preselect the DFV individuals based on pedigree but took more than 700 DFV bulls representing the most important breeding bulls of more than two generations.
