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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18298932)

  • 1. Measuring connectedness among herds in mixed linear models: from theory to practice in large-sized genetic evaluations.
    Fouilloux MN; Clément V; Laloë D
    Genet Sel Evol; 2008; 40(2):145-59. PubMed ID: 18298932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Connectedness among herds of beef cattle bred under natural service.
    Tarrés J; Fina M; Piedrafita J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2010 Feb; 42(1):6. PubMed ID: 20184760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Trends of the genetic connectedness measures among Nelore beef cattle herds.
    Pegolo NT; Laloë D; de Oliveira HN; Lôbo RB; Fouilloux MN
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2012 Feb; 129(1):20-9. PubMed ID: 22225581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A sampling method for estimating the accuracy of predicted breeding values in genetic evaluation.
    Fouilloux MN; Laloë D
    Genet Sel Evol; 2001; 33(5):473-86. PubMed ID: 11712970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Herd clustering strategies and corresponding genetic evaluations based on social-ecological characteristics for a local endangered cattle breed.
    Herold J; Brügemann K; König S
    Arch Anim Breed; 2021; 64(1):187-198. PubMed ID: 34109268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluation of methods for computing approximate accuracies of predicted breeding values in maternal random regression models for growth traits in beef cattle.
    Sánchez JP; Misztal I; Bertrand JK
    J Anim Sci; 2008 May; 86(5):1057-66. PubMed ID: 18203980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Variance heterogeneity and genotype by environment interactions in native Black and White dual-purpose cattle for different herd allocation schemes.
    Jaeger M; Brügemann K; Naderi S; Brandt H; König S
    Animal; 2019 Oct; 13(10):2146-2155. PubMed ID: 30854999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation models and genetic parameters for calving difficulty in beef cattle.
    Phocas F; Laloë D
    J Anim Sci; 2003 Apr; 81(4):933-8. PubMed ID: 12723082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Investigation of three strategies for an international genetic evaluation of beef cattle weaning weight.
    Phocas F; Donoghue K; Graser HU
    Genet Sel Evol; 2005; 37(4):361-80. PubMed ID: 15943917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Choice of artificial insemination beef bulls used to mate with female dairy cattle.
    Berry DP; Ring SC; Twomey AJ; Evans RD
    J Dairy Sci; 2020 Feb; 103(2):1701-1710. PubMed ID: 31785871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Genotype x environment interaction for grazing versus confinement. I. Production traits.
    Kearney JF; Schutz MM; Boettcher PJ; Weigel KA
    J Dairy Sci; 2004 Feb; 87(2):501-9. PubMed ID: 14762093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Short communication: Changes in the association between milk yield and age at first calving in holstein cows with herd environment level for milk yield.
    Ruiz-Sánchez R; Blake RW; Castro-Gámez HM; Sánchez F; Montaldo HH; Castillo-Juárez H
    J Dairy Sci; 2007 Oct; 90(10):4830-4. PubMed ID: 17881706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multibreed beef cattle populations derived from deregressed breeding values and phenotypes.
    Weber KL; Thallman RM; Keele JW; Snelling WM; Bennett GL; Smith TP; McDaneld TG; Allan MF; Van Eenennaam AL; Kuehn LA
    J Anim Sci; 2012 Dec; 90(12):4177-90. PubMed ID: 22767091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Characterization of best linear unbiased estimates generated from national genetic evaluations of reproductive performance, survival, and milk yield in dairy cows.
    Dunne FL; Kelleher MM; Walsh SW; Berry DP
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Aug; 101(8):7625-7637. PubMed ID: 29778473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. A simple method for genomic selection of moderately sized dairy cattle populations.
    Weller JI; Ron M; Glick G; Shirak A; Zeron Y; Ezra E
    Animal; 2012 Feb; 6(2):193-202. PubMed ID: 22436176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of clustering herds with small-sized contemporary groups in dairy cattle genetic evaluations.
    Vasconcelos J; Santos F; Bagnato A; Carvalheira J
    J Dairy Sci; 2008 Jan; 91(1):377-84. PubMed ID: 18096962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Across-country test-day model evaluations for Holstein, Nordic Red Cattle, and Jersey.
    Lidauer MH; Pösö J; Pedersen J; Lassen J; Madsen P; Mäntysaari EA; Nielsen US; Eriksson JÅ; Johansson K; Pitkänen T; Strandén I; Aamand GP
    J Dairy Sci; 2015 Feb; 98(2):1296-309. PubMed ID: 25434332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Application of a multiple-trait herd cluster model for genetic evaluation of dairy sires from seventeen countries.
    Zwald NR; Welgel KA; Fikse WF; Rekaya R
    J Dairy Sci; 2003 Jan; 86(1):376-82. PubMed ID: 12613881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The impact of direct-maternal genetic correlations on international beef cattle evaluations for Limousin weaning weight.
    Bonifazi R; Vandenplas J; Ten Napel J; Veerkamp RF; Calus MPL
    J Anim Sci; 2021 Sep; 99(9):. PubMed ID: 34333640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.