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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22162621)

  • 21. Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) and Its Application for Improving the Genomic Estimated Breeding Values (GEBV) of the Berkshire Pork Quality Traits.
    Lee YS; Jeong H; Taye M; Kim HJ; Ka S; Ryu YC; Cho S
    Asian-Australas J Anim Sci; 2015 Nov; 28(11):1551-7. PubMed ID: 26580278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Single-step SNP-BLUP with on-the-fly imputed genotypes and residual polygenic effects.
    Taskinen M; Mäntysaari EA; Strandén I
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Mar; 49(1):36. PubMed ID: 28359261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Best linear unbiased prediction and optimum allocation of test resources in maize breeding with doubled haploids.
    Mi X; Wegenast T; Utz HF; Dhillon BS; Melchinger AE
    Theor Appl Genet; 2011 Jun; 123(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 21547486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Electronic portal imaging with on-line correction of setup error in thoracic irradiation: clinical evaluation.
    Van de Steene J; Van den Heuvel F; Bel A; Verellen D; De Mey J; Noppen M; De Beukeleer M; Storme G
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1998 Mar; 40(4):967-76. PubMed ID: 9531383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Factors affecting accuracy from genomic selection in populations derived from multiple inbred lines: a Barley case study.
    Zhong S; Dekkers JC; Fernando RL; Jannink JL
    Genetics; 2009 May; 182(1):355-64. PubMed ID: 19299342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Effects of errors in pedigree on three methods of estimating breeding value for litter size, backfat and average daily gain in swine.
    Long TE; Johnson RK; Keele JW
    J Anim Sci; 1990 Dec; 68(12):4069-78. PubMed ID: 2286549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Using markers with large effect in genetic and genomic predictions.
    Lopes MS; Bovenhuis H; van Son M; Nordbø Ø; Grindflek EH; Knol EF; Bastiaansen JW
    J Anim Sci; 2017 Jan; 95(1):59-71. PubMed ID: 28177367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The misuse of BLUP in ecology and evolution.
    Hadfield JD; Wilson AJ; Garant D; Sheldon BC; Kruuk LE
    Am Nat; 2010 Jan; 175(1):116-25. PubMed ID: 19922262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Expanding the BLUP alphabet for genomic prediction adaptable to the genetic architectures of complex traits.
    Wang J; Zhou Z; Zhang Z; Li H; Liu D; Zhang Q; Bradbury PJ; Buckler ES; Zhang Z
    Heredity (Edinb); 2018 Dec; 121(6):648-662. PubMed ID: 29765161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Application of multivariate single-step SNP best linear unbiased predictor model and revised SNP list for genomic evaluation of dairy cattle in Australia.
    Konstantinov KV; Goddard ME
    J Dairy Sci; 2020 Sep; 103(9):8305-8316. PubMed ID: 32622609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Genomewide predictions from maize single-cross data.
    Massman JM; Gordillo A; Lorenzana RE; Bernardo R
    Theor Appl Genet; 2013 Jan; 126(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 22886355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Use of prediction methods to assess laboratory bias and mean values associated with an interlaboratory study for method validation and/or proficiency testing.
    McClure FD; Lee JK
    J AOAC Int; 2014; 97(2):624-9. PubMed ID: 24830176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Using Different Single-Step Strategies to Improve the Efficiency of Genomic Prediction on Body Measurement Traits in Pig.
    Song H; Zhang J; Zhang Q; Ding X
    Front Genet; 2018; 9():730. PubMed ID: 30693018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Different methods to calculate genomic predictions--comparisons of BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP).
    Koivula M; Strandén I; Su G; Mäntysaari EA
    J Dairy Sci; 2012 Jul; 95(7):4065-73. PubMed ID: 22720963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Animal model and multiple trait BLUP applied in poultry genetic evaluation].
    Pang H; Wu CX; Zhang Y; Gong GF; Bi YH
    Yi Chuan Xue Bao; 1989; 16(4):291-8. PubMed ID: 2486251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Host Genome Influence on Gut Microbial Composition and Microbial Prediction of Complex Traits in Pigs.
    Camarinha-Silva A; Maushammer M; Wellmann R; Vital M; Preuss S; Bennewitz J
    Genetics; 2017 Jul; 206(3):1637-1644. PubMed ID: 28468904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. How variation in predictor measurement affects the discriminative ability and transportability of a prediction model.
    Pajouheshnia R; van Smeden M; Peelen LM; Groenwold RHH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2019 Jan; 105():136-141. PubMed ID: 30223065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of BLUE and BLUP/REML in the selection of clones and families of potato (Solanum tuberosum).
    Ticona-Benavente CA; da Silva Filho DF
    Genet Mol Res; 2015 Dec; 14(4):18421-30. PubMed ID: 26782490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Separation of base allele and sampling term effects gives new insights in variance component QTL analysis.
    Rönnegård L; Carlborg O
    BMC Genet; 2007 Jan; 8():1. PubMed ID: 17210073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Design-based mapping of tree attributes by 3P sampling.
    Fattorini L; Franceschi S; Corona P
    Biom J; 2020 Nov; 62(7):1810-1825. PubMed ID: 32596846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.