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 *

203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11929624)

  • 1. Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information.
    Schenkel FS; Schaeffer LR; Boettcher PJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2002; 34(1):41-59. PubMed ID: 11929624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of restricted maximum likelihood and method R for estimating heritability and predicting breeding value under selection.
    Cantet RJ; Birchmeier AN; Santos-Cristal MG; de Avila VS
    J Anim Sci; 2000 Oct; 78(10):2554-60. PubMed ID: 11048920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The empirical bias of estimates by restricted maximum likelihood, Bayesian method, and method R under selection for additive, maternal, and dominance models.
    Duangjinda M; Misztal I; Bertrand JK; Tsuruta S
    J Anim Sci; 2001 Dec; 79(12):2991-6. PubMed ID: 11811451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Bias in estimates of variance components in populations undergoing genomic selection: a simulation study.
    Gao H; Madsen P; Aamand GP; Thomasen JR; Sørensen AC; Jensen J
    BMC Genomics; 2019 Dec; 20(1):956. PubMed ID: 31818251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Long-term response to genomic selection: effects of estimation method and reference population structure for different genetic architectures.
    Bastiaansen JW; Coster A; Calus MP; van Arendonk JA; Bovenhuis H
    Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Jan; 44(1):3. PubMed ID: 22273519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Different models of genetic variation and their effect on genomic evaluation.
    Clark SA; Hickey JM; van der Werf JH
    Genet Sel Evol; 2011 May; 43(1):18. PubMed ID: 21575265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Allele frequency changes due to hitch-hiking in genomic selection programs.
    Liu H; Sørensen AC; Meuwissen TH; Berg P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Feb; 46(1):8. PubMed ID: 24495634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Genetic evaluation with major genes and polygenic inheritance when some animals are not genotyped using gene content multiple-trait BLUP.
    Legarra A; Vitezica ZG
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Nov; 47():89. PubMed ID: 26576649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Application of single step genomic BLUP under different uncertain paternity scenarios using simulated data.
    Tonussi RL; Silva RMO; Magalhães AFB; Espigolan R; Peripolli E; Olivieri BF; Feitosa FLB; Lemos MVA; Berton MP; Chiaia HLJ; Pereira ASC; Lôbo RB; Bezerra LAF; Magnabosco CU; Lourenço DAL; Aguilar I; Baldi F
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(9):e0181752. PubMed ID: 28957330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Genomic selection models double the accuracy of predicted breeding values for bacterial cold water disease resistance compared to a traditional pedigree-based model in rainbow trout aquaculture.
    Vallejo RL; Leeds TD; Gao G; Parsons JE; Martin KE; Evenhuis JP; Fragomeni BO; Wiens GD; Palti Y
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Feb; 49(1):17. PubMed ID: 28148220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Using recent versus complete pedigree data in genetic evaluation of a closed nucleus broiler line.
    Mehrabani-Yeganeh H; Gibson JP; Schaeffer LR
    Poult Sci; 1999 Jul; 78(7):937-41. PubMed ID: 10404672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Genomic prediction of breeding values using previously estimated SNP variances.
    Calus MP; Schrooten C; Veerkamp RF
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Sep; 46(1):52. PubMed ID: 25928875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Optimum contribution selection using traditional best linear unbiased prediction and genomic breeding values in aquaculture breeding schemes.
    Nielsen HM; Sonesson AK; Meuwissen TH
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Mar; 89(3):630-8. PubMed ID: 21036937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A class of Bayesian methods to combine large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals for whole-genome analyses.
    Fernando RL; Dekkers JC; Garrick DJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Sep; 46(1):50. PubMed ID: 25253441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Bayesian methods for genomic breeding value estimation].
    Wang C; Ding X; Liu J; Yin Z; Zhang Q
    Yi Chuan; 2014 Feb; 36(2):111-8. PubMed ID: 24846939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Estimation of genetic parameters and prediction of breeding values for multivariate threshold and continuous data in a simulated horse population using Gibbs sampling and residual maximum likelihood.
    Stock KF; Hoeschele I; Distl O
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Oct; 124(5):308-19. PubMed ID: 17868084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Genotyping strategies for genomic selection in small dairy cattle populations.
    Jiménez-Montero JA; González-Recio O; Alenda R
    Animal; 2012 Aug; 6(8):1216-24. PubMed ID: 23217224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Optimised parent selection and minimum inbreeding mating in small aquaculture breeding schemes: a simulation study.
    Hely FS; Amer PR; Walker SP; Symonds JE
    Animal; 2013 Jan; 7(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 23031385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Controlling bias in genomic breeding values for young genotyped bulls.
    Tsuruta S; Lourenco DAL; Masuda Y; Misztal I; Lawlor TJ
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 Nov; 102(11):9956-9970. PubMed ID: 31495630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Should genetic groups be fitted in BLUP evaluation? Practical answer for the French AI beef sire evaluation.
    Phocas F; Laloë D
    Genet Sel Evol; 2004; 36(3):325-45. PubMed ID: 15107269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.