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 *

733 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18076471)

  • 1. Comparison of genomic and traditional BLUP-estimated breeding value accuracy and selection response under alternative trait and genomic parameters.
    Muir WM
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Dec; 124(6):342-55. PubMed ID: 18076471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges.
    Hayes BJ; Bowman PJ; Chamberlain AJ; Goddard ME
    J Dairy Sci; 2009 Feb; 92(2):433-43. PubMed ID: 19164653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The efficiency of genome-wide selection for genetic improvement of net merit.
    Togashi K; Lin CY; Yamazaki T
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Oct; 89(10):2972-80. PubMed ID: 21512116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Breeding value estimation for fat percentage using dense markers on Bos taurus autosome 14.
    de Roos AP; Schrooten C; Mullaart E; Calus MP; Veerkamp RF
    J Dairy Sci; 2007 Oct; 90(10):4821-9. PubMed ID: 17881705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Application of selection index calculations to determine selection strategies in genomic breeding programs.
    König S; Swalve HH
    J Dairy Sci; 2009 Oct; 92(10):5292-303. PubMed ID: 19762847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Preliminary investigation on reliability of genomic estimated breeding values in the Danish Holstein population.
    Su G; Guldbrandtsen B; Gregersen VR; Lund MS
    J Dairy Sci; 2010 Mar; 93(3):1175-83. PubMed ID: 20172238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of imputing markers from a low-density chip on the reliability of genomic breeding values in Holstein populations.
    Dassonneville R; Brøndum RF; Druet T; Fritz S; Guillaume F; Guldbrandtsen B; Lund MS; Ducrocq V; Su G
    J Dairy Sci; 2011 Jul; 94(7):3679-86. PubMed ID: 21700057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The importance of haplotype length and heritability using genomic selection in dairy cattle.
    Villumsen TM; Janss L; Lund MS
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2009 Feb; 126(1):3-13. PubMed ID: 19207924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Optimizing selection on multiple identified quantitative trait loci in population with overlapping generations.
    Tang GQ; Li XW
    Yi Chuan Xue Bao; 2006 May; 33(5):429-40. PubMed ID: 16722338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Marker-assisted selection can reduce true as well as pedigree-estimated inbreeding.
    Pedersen LD; Sørensen AC; Berg P
    J Dairy Sci; 2009 May; 92(5):2214-23. PubMed ID: 19389980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Genomic selection.
    Goddard ME; Hayes BJ
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Dec; 124(6):323-30. PubMed ID: 18076469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Long-term selection strategies for complex traits using high-density genetic markers.
    Kemper KE; Bowman PJ; Pryce JE; Hayes BJ; Goddard ME
    J Dairy Sci; 2012 Aug; 95(8):4646-56. PubMed ID: 22818479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Accuracy of breeding values when using and ignoring the polygenic effect in genomic breeding value estimation with a marker density of one SNP per cM.
    Calus MP; Veerkamp RF
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Dec; 124(6):362-8. PubMed ID: 18076473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison between genomic predictions using daughter yield deviation and conventional estimated breeding value as response variables.
    Guo G; Lund MS; Zhang Y; Su G
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2010 Dec; 127(6):423-32. PubMed ID: 21077966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effects of number of training generations on genomic prediction for various traits in a layer chicken population.
    Weng Z; Wolc A; Shen X; Fernando RL; Dekkers JC; Arango J; Settar P; Fulton JE; O'Sullivan NP; Garrick DJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Mar; 48():22. PubMed ID: 26992471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Accuracy of genomic breeding values for residual feed intake in crossbred beef cattle.
    Mujibi FD; Nkrumah JD; Durunna ON; Stothard P; Mah J; Wang Z; Basarab J; Plastow G; Crews DH; Moore SS
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Nov; 89(11):3353-61. PubMed ID: 21642493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 37.