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 *

266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25324160)

  • 1. Unraveling additive from nonadditive effects using genomic relationship matrices.
    Muñoz PR; Resende MF; Gezan SA; Resende MD; de Los Campos G; Kirst M; Huber D; Peter GF
    Genetics; 2014 Dec; 198(4):1759-68. PubMed ID: 25324160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Integrating Nonadditive Genomic Relationship Matrices into the Study of Genetic Architecture of Complex Traits.
    Nazarian A; Gezan SA
    J Hered; 2016 Mar; 107(2):153-62. PubMed ID: 26712858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Genome-Enabled Estimates of Additive and Nonadditive Genetic Variances and Prediction of Apple Phenotypes Across Environments.
    Kumar S; Molloy C; Muñoz P; Daetwyler H; Chagné D; Volz R
    G3 (Bethesda); 2015 Oct; 5(12):2711-8. PubMed ID: 26497141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Genomic Predictions With Nonadditive Effects Improved Estimates of Additive Effects and Predictions of Total Genetic Values in
    Calleja-Rodriguez A; Chen Z; Suontama M; Pan J; Wu HX
    Front Plant Sci; 2021; 12():666820. PubMed ID: 34305966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Implementation of the Realized Genomic Relationship Matrix to Open-Pollinated White Spruce Family Testing for Disentangling Additive from Nonadditive Genetic Effects.
    Gamal El-Dien O; Ratcliffe B; Klápště J; Porth I; Chen C; El-Kassaby YA
    G3 (Bethesda); 2016 Jan; 6(3):743-53. PubMed ID: 26801647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Genomic estimated breeding values using genomic relationship matrices in a cloned population of loblolly pine.
    Zapata-Valenzuela J; Whetten RW; Neale D; McKeand S; Isik F
    G3 (Bethesda); 2013 May; 3(5):909-16. PubMed ID: 23585458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Genomic Studies Reveal Substantial Dominant Effects and Improved Genomic Predictions in an Open-Pollinated Breeding Population of
    Thavamanikumar S; Arnold RJ; Luo J; Thumma BR
    G3 (Bethesda); 2020 Oct; 10(10):3751-3763. PubMed ID: 32788286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The contribution of dominance to phenotype prediction in a pine breeding and simulated population.
    de Almeida Filho JE; Guimarães JF; E Silva FF; de Resende MD; Muñoz P; Kirst M; Resende MF
    Heredity (Edinb); 2016 Jul; 117(1):33-41. PubMed ID: 27118156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Estimating dominance genetic variances for growth traits in American Angus males using genomic models.
    Garcia-Baccino CA; Lourenco DAL; Miller S; Cantet RJC; Vitezica ZG
    J Anim Sci; 2020 Jan; 98(1):. PubMed ID: 31867623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Genomic Model with Correlation Between Additive and Dominance Effects.
    Xiang T; Christensen OF; Vitezica ZG; Legarra A
    Genetics; 2018 Jul; 209(3):711-723. PubMed ID: 29743175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Genomic prediction of fertility and calving traits in Holstein cattle based on models including epistatic genetic effects.
    Alves K; Brito LF; Schenkel FS
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2023 Sep; 140(5):568-581. PubMed ID: 37254293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dominance and epistatic genetic variances for litter size in pigs using genomic models.
    Vitezica ZG; Reverter A; Herring W; Legarra A
    Genet Sel Evol; 2018 Dec; 50(1):71. PubMed ID: 30577727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Genomic relationships reveal significant dominance effects for growth in hybrid Eucalyptus.
    Tan B; Grattapaglia D; Wu HX; Ingvarsson PK
    Plant Sci; 2018 Feb; 267():84-93. PubMed ID: 29362102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Genomic Prediction of Additive and Non-additive Effects Using Genetic Markers and Pedigrees.
    de Almeida Filho JE; Guimarães JFR; Fonsceca E Silva F; Vilela de Resende MD; Muñoz P; Kirst M; de Resende Júnior MFR
    G3 (Bethesda); 2019 Aug; 9(8):2739-2748. PubMed ID: 31263059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Genomic analysis of dominance effects on milk production and conformation traits in Fleckvieh cattle.
    Ertl J; Legarra A; Vitezica ZG; Varona L; Edel C; Emmerling R; Götz KU
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jun; 46(1):40. PubMed ID: 24962065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Mixed model methods for genomic prediction and variance component estimation of additive and dominance effects using SNP markers.
    Da Y; Wang C; Wang S; Hu G
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(1):e87666. PubMed ID: 24498162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Increased Prediction Ability in Norway Spruce Trials Using a Marker X Environment Interaction and Non-Additive Genomic Selection Model.
    Chen ZQ; Baison J; Pan J; Westin J; Gil MRG; Wu HX
    J Hered; 2019 Dec; 110(7):830-843. PubMed ID: 31629368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Genetic Variance Partitioning and Genome-Wide Prediction with Allele Dosage Information in Autotetraploid Potato.
    Endelman JB; Carley CAS; Bethke PC; Coombs JJ; Clough ME; da Silva WL; De Jong WS; Douches DS; Frederick CM; Haynes KG; Holm DG; Miller JC; Muñoz PR; Navarro FM; Novy RG; Palta JP; Porter GA; Rak KT; Sathuvalli VR; Thompson AL; Yencho GC
    Genetics; 2018 May; 209(1):77-87. PubMed ID: 29514860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Estimating additive and non-additive genetic variances and predicting genetic merits using genome-wide dense single nucleotide polymorphism markers.
    Su G; Christensen OF; Ostersen T; Henryon M; Lund MS
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(9):e45293. PubMed ID: 23028912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.