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 *

221 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25866073)

  • 1. Genomic best linear unbiased prediction method reflecting the degree of linkage disequilibrium.
    Nishio M; Satoh M
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2015 Oct; 132(5):357-65. PubMed ID: 25866073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Using selection index theory to estimate consistency of multi-locus linkage disequilibrium across populations.
    Wientjes YC; Veerkamp RF; Calus MP
    BMC Genet; 2015 Jul; 16():87. PubMed ID: 26187501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Empirical and deterministic accuracies of across-population genomic prediction.
    Wientjes YC; Veerkamp RF; Bijma P; Bovenhuis H; Schrooten C; Calus MP
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Feb; 47(1):5. PubMed ID: 25885467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accounting for trait architecture in genomic predictions of US Holstein cattle using a weighted realized relationship matrix.
    Tiezzi F; Maltecca C
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Apr; 47(1):24. PubMed ID: 25886167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Across population genomic prediction scenarios in which Bayesian variable selection outperforms GBLUP.
    van den Berg S; Calus MP; Meuwissen TH; Wientjes YC
    BMC Genet; 2015 Dec; 16():146. PubMed ID: 26698836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Genomic prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fifty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes.
    Kizilkaya K; Fernando RL; Garrick DJ
    J Anim Sci; 2010 Feb; 88(2):544-51. PubMed ID: 19820059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. A novel genomic selection method combining GBLUP and LASSO.
    Li H; Wang J; Bao Z
    Genetica; 2015 Jun; 143(3):299-304. PubMed ID: 25655266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Improving Genomic Predictions in Multi-Breed Cattle Populations: A Comparative Analysis of BayesR and GBLUP Models.
    Ma H; Li H; Ge F; Zhao H; Zhu B; Zhang L; Gao H; Xu L; Li J; Wang Z
    Genes (Basel); 2024 Feb; 15(2):. PubMed ID: 38397242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Contributions of linkage disequilibrium and co-segregation information to the accuracy of genomic prediction.
    Sun X; Fernando R; Dekkers J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Oct; 48(1):77. PubMed ID: 27729012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Genomic Prediction Using Multi-trait Weighted GBLUP Accounting for Heterogeneous Variances and Covariances Across the Genome.
    Karaman E; Lund MS; Anche MT; Janss L; Su G
    G3 (Bethesda); 2018 Nov; 8(11):3549-3558. PubMed ID: 30194089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Genomic predictions across Nordic Holstein and Nordic Red using the genomic best linear unbiased prediction model with different genomic relationship matrices.
    Zhou L; Lund MS; Wang Y; Su G
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2014 Aug; 131(4):249-57. PubMed ID: 24750283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Expanding the application of haplotype-based genomic predictions to the wild: A case of antibody response against Teladorsagia circumcincta in Soay sheep.
    Vahedi SM; Salek Ardetani S; Brito LF; Karimi K; Pahlavan Afshari K; Banabazi MH
    BMC Genomics; 2023 Jun; 24(1):335. PubMed ID: 37330501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An efficient unified model for genome-wide association studies and genomic selection.
    Li H; Su G; Jiang L; Bao Z
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Aug; 49(1):64. PubMed ID: 28836943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Accuracy of predicting genomic breeding values for residual feed intake in Angus and Charolais beef cattle.
    Chen L; Schenkel F; Vinsky M; Crews DH; Li C
    J Anim Sci; 2013 Oct; 91(10):4669-78. PubMed ID: 24078618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Genome-wide association mapping and genomic prediction of agronomical traits and breeding values in Iranian wheat under rain-fed and well-watered conditions.
    Rabieyan E; Bihamta MR; Moghaddam ME; Mohammadi V; Alipour H
    BMC Genomics; 2022 Dec; 23(1):831. PubMed ID: 36522726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.