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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25453600)

  • 21. Effects of a breeding scheme combined by genomic pre-selection and progeny testing on annual genetic gain in a dairy cattle population.
    Yamazaki T; Togashi K; Iwama S; Matsumoto S; Moribe K; Nakanishi T; Hagiya K; Hayasaka K
    Anim Sci J; 2014 Jun; 85(6):639-49. PubMed ID: 24612342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The impact of selective genotyping on the response to selection using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction.
    Howard JT; Rathje TA; Bruns CE; Wilson-Wells DF; Kachman SD; Spangler ML
    J Anim Sci; 2018 Nov; 96(11):4532-4542. PubMed ID: 30107560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effect of enlarging the reference population with (un)genotyped animals on the accuracy of genomic selection in dairy cattle.
    Pszczola M; Mulder HA; Calus MP
    J Dairy Sci; 2011 Jan; 94(1):431-41. PubMed ID: 21183054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Efficiency of multi-breed genomic selection for dairy cattle breeds with different sizes of reference population.
    Hozé C; Fritz S; Phocas F; Boichard D; Ducrocq V; Croiseau P
    J Dairy Sci; 2014; 97(6):3918-29. PubMed ID: 24704232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Improving accuracy of bulls' predicted genomic breeding values for fertility using daughters' milk progesterone profiles.
    Tenghe AMM; Bouwman AC; Berglund B; de Koning DJ; Veerkamp RF
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Jun; 101(6):5177-5193. PubMed ID: 29525306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Considering genetic characteristics in German Holstein breeding programs.
    Segelke D; Täubert H; Reinhardt F; Thaller G
    J Dairy Sci; 2016 Jan; 99(1):458-67. PubMed ID: 26601581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Genomic selection for the improvement of meat quality in beef.
    Pimentel EC; König S
    J Anim Sci; 2012 Oct; 90(10):3418-26. PubMed ID: 22665643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Comparison of genomic predictions for lowly heritable traits using multi-step and single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor in Holstein cattle.
    Guarini AR; Lourenco DAL; Brito LF; Sargolzaei M; Baes CF; Miglior F; Misztal I; Schenkel FS
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Sep; 101(9):8076-8086. PubMed ID: 29935829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Genomic selection in a pig population including information from slaughtered full sibs of boars within a sib-testing program.
    Samorè AB; Buttazzoni L; Gallo M; Russo V; Fontanesi L
    Animal; 2015 May; 9(5):750-9. PubMed ID: 25510405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The effect of using cow genomic information on accuracy and bias of genomic breeding values in a simulated Holstein dairy cattle population.
    Dehnavi E; Mahyari SA; Schenkel FS; Sargolzaei M
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Jun; 101(6):5166-5176. PubMed ID: 29605309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Optimal strategies for the use of genomic selection in dairy cattle breeding programs.
    Wensch-Dorendorf M; Yin T; Swalve HH; König S
    J Dairy Sci; 2011 Aug; 94(8):4140-51. PubMed ID: 21787949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effect of genotyped cows in the reference population on the genomic evaluation of Holstein cattle.
    Uemoto Y; Osawa T; Saburi J
    Animal; 2017 Mar; 11(3):382-393. PubMed ID: 27515004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Genomic clustering helps to improve prediction in a multibreed population.
    Ventura R; Larmer S; Schenkel FS; Miller SP; Sullivan P
    J Anim Sci; 2016 May; 94(5):1844-56. PubMed ID: 27285682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Including different groups of genotyped females for genomic prediction in a Nordic Jersey population.
    Gao H; Madsen P; Nielsen US; Aamand GP; Su G; Byskov K; Jensen J
    J Dairy Sci; 2015 Dec; 98(12):9051-9. PubMed ID: 26433419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Which Individuals To Choose To Update the Reference Population? Minimizing the Loss of Genetic Diversity in Animal Genomic Selection Programs.
    Eynard SE; Croiseau P; Laloë D; Fritz S; Calus MPL; Restoux G
    G3 (Bethesda); 2018 Jan; 8(1):113-121. PubMed ID: 29133511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Investigating the benefits and perils of importing genetic material in small cattle breeding programs via simulation.
    Obšteter J; Jenko J; Pocrnic I; Gorjanc G
    J Dairy Sci; 2023 Aug; 106(8):5593-5605. PubMed ID: 37474361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Most of the benefits from genomic selection can be realized by genotyping a small proportion of available selection candidates.
    Henryon M; Berg P; Ostersen T; Nielsen B; Sørensen AC
    J Anim Sci; 2012 Dec; 90(13):4681-9. PubMed ID: 23087087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Genomic selection improves the possibility of applying multiple breeding programs in different environments.
    Slagboom M; Kargo M; Sørensen AC; Thomasen JR; Mulder HA
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 Sep; 102(9):8197-8209. PubMed ID: 31326182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.