These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10404672)

  • 41. Prediction accuracy for a simulated maternally affected trait of beef cattle using different genomic evaluation models.
    Lourenco DA; Misztal I; Wang H; Aguilar I; Tsuruta S; Bertrand JK
    J Anim Sci; 2013 Sep; 91(9):4090-8. PubMed ID: 23893997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Effects of genomic selection on genetic improvement, inbreeding, and merit of young versus proven bulls.
    de Roos AP; Schrooten C; Veerkamp RF; van Arendonk JA
    J Dairy Sci; 2011 Mar; 94(3):1559-67. PubMed ID: 21338821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Comparison of selection based on phenotype, selection index and best linear unbiased prediction using data from a closed broiler line.
    Morris AJ; Pollott GE
    Br Poult Sci; 1997 Jul; 38(3):249-54. PubMed ID: 9280349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Maximizing the response of selection with a predefined rate of inbreeding: overlapping generations.
    Meuwissen TH; Sonesson AK
    J Anim Sci; 1998 Oct; 76(10):2575-83. PubMed ID: 9814896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Genetic progress in multistage dairy cattle breeding schemes using genetic markers.
    Schrooten C; Bovenhuis H; van Arendonk JA; Bijma P
    J Dairy Sci; 2005 Apr; 88(4):1569-81. PubMed ID: 15778327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Efficient selection against categorically scored hip dysplasia in dogs is possible using best linear unbiased prediction and optimum contribution selection: a simulation study.
    Malm S; Sørensen AC; Fikse WF; Strandberg E
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2013 Apr; 130(2):154-64. PubMed ID: 23496016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Multiple-trait breeding values for parental selection in self-pollinating crops.
    Bauer AM; Léon J
    Theor Appl Genet; 2008 Jan; 116(2):235-42. PubMed ID: 17955207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Assessing genetic gain, inbreeding, and bias attributable to different flock genetic means in alternative sheep sire referencing schemes.
    Kuehn LA; Notter DR; Lewis RM
    J Anim Sci; 2008 Mar; 86(3):526-35. PubMed ID: 18073281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Modeling missing pedigree in single-step genomic BLUP.
    Bradford HL; Masuda Y; VanRaden PM; Legarra A; Misztal I
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 Mar; 102(3):2336-2346. PubMed ID: 30638995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Selection for body weight at eight weeks of age in dwarf and normal meat-type chickens originating from a common control population background.
    Marks HL
    Poult Sci; 1983 Feb; 62(2):227-34. PubMed ID: 6835899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Benefits of testing in both bio-secure and production environments in genomic selection breeding programs for commercial broiler chicken.
    Chu TT; Alemu SW; Norberg E; Sørensen AC; Henshall J; Hawken R; Jensen J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2018 Nov; 50(1):52. PubMed ID: 30390619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Estimation of genetic parameters using sampled data from populations undergoing selection.
    Jensen J; Mao IL
    J Dairy Sci; 1991 Oct; 74(10):3544-51. PubMed ID: 1744281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Marker-assisted selection reduces expected inbreeding but can result in large effects of hitchhiking.
    Pedersen LD; Sørensen AC; Berg P
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2010 Jun; 127(3):189-98. PubMed ID: 20536636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Comparison of selection methods at the same level of inbreeding.
    Quinton M; Smith C; Goddard ME
    J Anim Sci; 1992 Apr; 70(4):1060-7. PubMed ID: 1582935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Genetic analysis on the direct response to divergent selection for phytate phosphorus bioavailability in a randombred chicken population.
    Zhang W; Aggrey SE; Pesti GM; Bakalli RI; Edwards HM
    Poult Sci; 2005 Mar; 84(3):370-5. PubMed ID: 15782904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Toward a theory of marker-assisted gene pyramiding.
    Servin B; Martin OC; Mézard M; Hospital F
    Genetics; 2004 Sep; 168(1):513-23. PubMed ID: 15454561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Genetic diversity in an indigenous horse breed: implications for mating strategies and the control of future inbreeding.
    Hasler H; Flury C; Menet S; Haase B; Leeb T; Simianer H; Poncet PA; Rieder S
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2011 Oct; 128(5):394-406. PubMed ID: 21906185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Technical note: Impact of pedigree depth on convergence of single-step genomic BLUP in a purebred swine population.
    Pocrnic I; Lourenco DAL; Bradford HL; Chen CY; Misztal I
    J Anim Sci; 2017 Aug; 95(8):3391-3395. PubMed ID: 28805917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Pedigree and marker information requirements to monitor genetic variability.
    Baumung R; Sölkner J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2003; 35(4):369-83. PubMed ID: 12927072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Prediction of rates of inbreeding in populations selected on best linear unbiased prediction of breeding value.
    Bijma P; Woolliams JA
    Genetics; 2000 Sep; 156(1):361-73. PubMed ID: 10978299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.