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 *

404 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17504955)

  • 1. Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance.
    Dekkers JC
    J Anim Sci; 2007 Sep; 85(9):2104-14. PubMed ID: 17504955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Prediction of response to marker-assisted and genomic selection using selection index theory.
    Dekkers JC
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Dec; 124(6):331-41. PubMed ID: 18076470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Genomic selection in admixed and crossbred populations.
    Toosi A; Fernando RL; Dekkers JC
    J Anim Sci; 2010 Jan; 88(1):32-46. PubMed ID: 19749023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The relevance of purebred information for predicting genetic merit of survival at birth of crossbred piglets.
    Cecchinato A; de los Campos G; Gianola D; Gallo L; Carnier P
    J Anim Sci; 2010 Feb; 88(2):481-90. PubMed ID: 19897636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Genomic evaluation by including dominance effects and inbreeding depression for purebred and crossbred performance with an application in pigs.
    Xiang T; Christensen OF; Vitezica ZG; Legarra A
    Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Nov; 48(1):92. PubMed ID: 27887565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A bivariate genomic model with additive, dominance and inbreeding depression effects for sire line and three-way crossbred pigs.
    Christensen OF; Nielsen B; Su G; Xiang T; Madsen P; Ostersen T; Velander I; Strathe AB
    Genet Sel Evol; 2019 Aug; 51(1):45. PubMed ID: 31426753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Effect of population size of performance test on short-term selection result of sire line].
    Zhang H; Li JQ; Wang C; Liu XH; Chen YS
    Yi Chuan Xue Bao; 2005 Jul; 32(7):696-703. PubMed ID: 16078737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Pedigree and genomic evaluation of pigs using a terminal-cross model.
    Tusell L; Gilbert H; Riquet J; Mercat MJ; Legarra A; Larzul C
    Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Apr; 48():32. PubMed ID: 27056443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Genetic evaluation combining purebred and crossbred data in a pig breeding scheme.
    Ibáñez-Escriche N; Reixach J; Lleonart N; Noguera JL
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Dec; 89(12):3881-9. PubMed ID: 21841081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reciprocal recurrent selection for 21-day litter weight of crossbred gilts. II. Reproductive performance of purebred females producing purebred and two-way cross litters and performance of purebred and crossbred pigs.
    Young LD; Omtvedt IT; Whatley JA; Johnson RK
    J Anim Sci; 1983 Dec; 57(6):1431-9. PubMed ID: 6674283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of Predicted Genomic Breeding Values in Purebred and Crossbred Pigs.
    Hidalgo AM; Bastiaansen JW; Lopes MS; Harlizius B; Groenen MA; de Koning DJ
    G3 (Bethesda); 2015 May; 5(8):1575-83. PubMed ID: 26019187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The value of using DNA markers for beef bull selection in the seedstock sector.
    Van Eenennaam AL; van der Werf JH; Goddard ME
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Feb; 89(2):307-20. PubMed ID: 21262975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Optimizing genomic reference populations to improve crossbred performance.
    Wientjes YCJ; Bijma P; Calus MPL
    Genet Sel Evol; 2020 Nov; 52(1):65. PubMed ID: 33158416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Deterministic models of breeding scheme designs that incorporate genomic selection.
    Pryce JE; Goddard ME; Raadsma HW; Hayes BJ
    J Dairy Sci; 2010 Nov; 93(11):5455-66. PubMed ID: 20965361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Variance components and heritabilities for sow productivity traits estimated from purebred versus crossbred sows.
    Ehlers MJ; Mabry JW; Bertrand JK; Stalder KJ
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2005 Oct; 122(5):318-24. PubMed ID: 16191040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Purebred and Crossbred Genomic Evaluation and Mate Allocation Strategies To Exploit Dominance in Pig Crossbreeding Schemes.
    González-Diéguez D; Tusell L; Bouquet A; Legarra A; Vitezica ZG
    G3 (Bethesda); 2020 Aug; 10(8):2829-2841. PubMed ID: 32554752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Genetic correlations between two strains of Durocs and crossbreds from differing production environments for slaughter traits.
    Zumbach B; Misztal I; Tsuruta S; Holl J; Herring W; Long T
    J Anim Sci; 2007 Apr; 85(4):901-8. PubMed ID: 17178815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Maximizing crossbred performance through purebred genomic selection.
    Esfandyari H; Sørensen AC; Bijma P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Mar; 47(1):16. PubMed ID: 25887297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.