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.
399 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22321529)
1. The importance of information on relatives for the prediction of genomic breeding values and the implications for the makeup of reference data sets in livestock breeding schemes. Clark SA; Hickey JM; Daetwyler HD; van der Werf JH Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Feb; 44(1):4. PubMed ID: 22321529 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Accuracy of pedigree and genomic predictions of carcass and novel meat quality traits in multi-breed sheep data assessed by cross-validation. Daetwyler HD; Swan AA; van der Werf JH; Hayes BJ Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Nov; 44(1):33. PubMed ID: 23146144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Impact and utility of shallow pedigree using single-step genomic BLUP for prediction of unbiased genomic breeding values. Gowane GR; Alex R; Mukherjee A; Vohra V Trop Anim Health Prod; 2022 Oct; 54(6):339. PubMed ID: 36210357 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Accuracy of genomic selection for a sib-evaluated trait using identity-by-state and identity-by-descent relationships. Vela-Avitúa S; Meuwissen TH; Luan T; Ødegård J Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Feb; 47(1):9. PubMed ID: 25888184 [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. 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]
8. Response to genomic selection: the Bulmer effect and the potential of genomic selection when the number of phenotypic records is limiting. Van Grevenhof EM; Van Arendonk JA; Bijma P Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Aug; 44(1):26. PubMed ID: 22862849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. SNP- and haplotype-based single-step genomic predictions for body weight, wool, and reproductive traits in North American Rambouillet sheep. Araujo AC; Carneiro PLS; Oliveira HR; Lewis RM; Brito LF J Anim Breed Genet; 2023 Mar; 140(2):216-234. PubMed ID: 36408677 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Opportunities for genomic selection in American mink: A simulation study. Karimi K; Sargolzaei M; Plastow GS; Wang Z; Miar Y PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0213873. PubMed ID: 30870528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Use of a Bayesian model including QTL markers increases prediction reliability when test animals are distant from the reference population. Ma P; Lund MS; Aamand GP; Su G J Dairy Sci; 2019 Aug; 102(8):7237-7247. PubMed ID: 31155255 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Impact of Genomic and Traditional Selection on the Contribution of Mutational Variance to Long-Term Selection Response and Genetic Variance. Mulder HA; Lee SH; Clark S; Hayes BJ; van der Werf JHJ Genetics; 2019 Oct; 213(2):361-378. PubMed ID: 31431471 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. An efficient exact method to obtain GBLUP and single-step GBLUP when the genomic relationship matrix is singular. Fernando RL; Cheng H; Garrick DJ Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Oct; 48(1):80. PubMed ID: 27788669 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Genomic prediction based on data from three layer lines: a comparison between linear methods. Calus MP; Huang H; Vereijken A; Visscher J; Ten Napel J; Windig JJ Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Oct; 46(1):57. PubMed ID: 25927219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Random forest estimation of genomic breeding values for disease susceptibility over different disease incidences and genomic architectures in simulated cow calibration groups. Naderi S; Yin T; König S J Dairy Sci; 2016 Sep; 99(9):7261-7273. PubMed ID: 27344385 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparison of five methods to predict genomic breeding values of dairy bulls from genome-wide SNP markers. Moser G; Tier B; Crump RE; Khatkar MS; Raadsma HW Genet Sel Evol; 2009 Dec; 41(1):56. PubMed ID: 20043835 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Genomic prediction of reproduction traits for Merino sheep. Bolormaa S; Brown DJ; Swan AA; van der Werf JHJ; Hayes BJ; Daetwyler HD Anim Genet; 2017 Jun; 48(3):338-348. PubMed ID: 28211150 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Predicting the accuracy of genomic predictions. Dekkers JCM; Su H; Cheng J Genet Sel Evol; 2021 Jun; 53(1):55. PubMed ID: 34187354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Accuracy of Genomic Prediction in Synthetic Populations Depending on the Number of Parents, Relatedness, and Ancestral Linkage Disequilibrium. Schopp P; Müller D; Technow F; Melchinger AE Genetics; 2017 Jan; 205(1):441-454. PubMed ID: 28049710 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]