Of course there are. This is like complaining that the entire three-toed sloth species has a very low speed and that there are no that there are no high-speed sloths that can breed sprinting back into the species.
This has absolutely zero to do with inbreeding. Both these species occupy niches at opposite ends of the speed spectrum of mammals and both of them are superbly, and hence obligately, adapted to that niche. The absence of sprinting sloths has nothing whatsoever to do with a lack of genetic diveristy. Sloths are as genetically diverse as any other species.
No sloths can sprint because sloths have become superb specialists of a slow-burn lifestyle and that precludes any sprinters. That doesn’t mean that some sloths aren’t slightly faster than others and wouldn’t be favoured if increased speed were a survival advantage. And exactly the same is true of cheetahs. Some cheetahs will have slightly better stamina than others and will be selected if that is beneficial.
In reality, like all specialist species, the sloth and the cheetah will probably become extinct if their specialistaions cease to be advantageous. It’s almost impossible to climb back down that evolutionary tree and exploit an alternative niche faster than the myriad of existing generalists. This is the peril of specialisation.
But this has absolutely nothing to do with inbreeding. Any specialist will face the exact same problems precisely because they are specialists.
I thought I already had in the post that you quoted: negative recessive trait thrown up by inbreeding is very rapidly swamped by outbreeding with the individuals who don’t carry that trait. The cheetahs problems are not caused in any way by negative recessive traits. They are caused by a lack of genetic diversity making them susceptible to disease, something else that I raised in the post that quoted from: The other issue however is that you now have very limited genetic variability. That poses a problem when the population is confronted with novel diseases and is far more likely to lead to extinction than the direct results of inbreeding.
I’m not sure what about that post confused you, but to make it clearer: despite being descended from an ancestral pool of fewer than 10 individuals cheetahs are doing fine. They are not suffering from what Chronos called “negative recessive traits”. That is what I quoted and what I was directly referring to in that post. That is what I mean by doing fine: they are non-defectives. Such defectives are actually perishingly small even in inbred natural populations and do not require the high levels of culling that Chronos thought was necessary.
The OP wanted to know what organisms could grow back to their original height in numbers form single survivor. Cheetahs only produce two cubs normally, but there survival from <10 ancestors shows that an animal like a cat or rat that produces litters of six or more could potentialy recover from a single pregnant female. I can’t see any reason why cheetahs couldn’t have recovered there original population size in a world where humans and climate allowed them to occupy their entire former range. Bit of a bummer going through that bottlneck just as agriculture was invented,.
Cheetahs do have very limited genetic variability. That poses a problem when the population is confronted with novel diseases and is far more likely to lead to extinction than the direct results of inbreeding. I really can’t make that point any more clear than I made it originally aside from stating quite clearly that extinction is not doing fine. However the OP explicitly assumed ideal circumstances. That means no disease, no conflict with human agriculturalists and so forth.
I guess the answer for the OP is that if we allow pregnant females then any mammal that produces large litters could recover from a single individual. Those that reproduce fastest will recover fastest, so rodents will fare better than cheetahs. I would guess that a rodent with a narrow range, such as an island rat, could rebound from a single individual in as little as a few hundred years.
For animals that produce only single offspring it gets harder to say for sure but potentially even something like a cow could rebound ion a few milennia.