519 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25884158)
21. Application of Bayesian least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and BayesCπ methods for genomic selection in French Holstein and Montbéliarde breeds.
Colombani C; Legarra A; Fritz S; Guillaume F; Croiseau P; Ducrocq V; Robert-Granié C
J Dairy Sci; 2013 Jan; 96(1):575-91. PubMed ID: 23127905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Imputation of genotypes with low-density chips and its effect on reliability of direct genomic values in Dutch Holstein cattle.
Mulder HA; Calus MP; Druet T; Schrooten C
J Dairy Sci; 2012 Feb; 95(2):876-89. PubMed ID: 22281352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Accuracy of genomic breeding values for residual feed intake in crossbred beef cattle.
Mujibi FD; Nkrumah JD; Durunna ON; Stothard P; Mah J; Wang Z; Basarab J; Plastow G; Crews DH; Moore SS
J Anim Sci; 2011 Nov; 89(11):3353-61. PubMed ID: 21642493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Accuracies of genomically estimated breeding values from pure-breed and across-breed predictions in Australian beef cattle.
Boerner V; Johnston DJ; Tier B
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Oct; 46(1):61. PubMed ID: 25927468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparison of genomic predictions using medium-density (∼54,000) and high-density (∼777,000) single nucleotide polymorphism marker panels in Nordic Holstein and Red Dairy Cattle populations.
Su G; Brøndum RF; Ma P; Guldbrandtsen B; Aamand GP; Lund MS
J Dairy Sci; 2012 Aug; 95(8):4657-65. PubMed ID: 22818480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The value of cows in reference populations for genomic selection of new functional traits.
Buch LH; Kargo M; Berg P; Lassen J; Sørensen AC
Animal; 2012 Jun; 6(6):880-6. PubMed ID: 22558957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Improving accuracy of genomic predictions within and between dairy cattle breeds with imputed high-density single nucleotide polymorphism panels.
Erbe M; Hayes BJ; Matukumalli LK; Goswami S; Bowman PJ; Reich CM; Mason BA; Goddard ME
J Dairy Sci; 2012 Jul; 95(7):4114-29. PubMed ID: 22720968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Accuracy of genomic prediction using deregressed breeding values estimated from purebred and crossbred offspring phenotypes in pigs.
Hidalgo AM; Bastiaansen JW; Lopes MS; Veroneze R; Groenen MA; de Koning DJ
J Anim Sci; 2015 Jul; 93(7):3313-21. PubMed ID: 26440000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Model comparison on genomic predictions using high-density markers for different groups of bulls in the Nordic Holstein population.
Gao H; Su G; Janss L; Zhang Y; Lund MS
J Dairy Sci; 2013 Jul; 96(7):4678-87. PubMed ID: 23660137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Genome scan for meat quality traits in Nelore beef cattle.
Tizioto PC; Decker JE; Taylor JF; Schnabel RD; Mudadu MA; Silva FL; Mourão GB; Coutinho LL; Tholon P; Sonstegard TS; Rosa AN; Alencar MM; Tullio RR; Medeiros SR; Nassu RT; Feijó GL; Silva LO; Torres RA; Siqueira F; Higa RH; Regitano LC
Physiol Genomics; 2013 Nov; 45(21):1012-20. PubMed ID: 24022219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Use of principal component approach to predict direct genomic breeding values for beef traits in Italian Simmental cattle.
Gaspa G; Pintus MA; Nicolazzi EL; Vicario D; Valentini A; Dimauro C; Macciotta NP
J Anim Sci; 2013 Jan; 91(1):29-37. PubMed ID: 23100576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Reduction in accuracy of genomic prediction for ordered categorical data compared to continuous observations.
Kizilkaya K; Fernando RL; Garrick DJ
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jun; 46(1):37. PubMed ID: 24912924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Accuracy of genomic prediction using different models and response variables in the Nordic Red cattle population.
Gao H; Lund MS; Zhang Y; Su G
J Anim Breed Genet; 2013 Oct; 130(5):333-40. PubMed ID: 24074170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. Multibreed genomic prediction using multitrait genomic residual maximum likelihood and multitask Bayesian variable selection.
Calus MPL; Goddard ME; Wientjes YCJ; Bowman PJ; Hayes BJ
J Dairy Sci; 2018 May; 101(5):4279-4294. PubMed ID: 29550121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Accuracy of genomic prediction when combining two related crossbred populations.
Vallée A; van Arendonk JA; Bovenhuis H
J Anim Sci; 2014 Oct; 92(10):4342-8. PubMed ID: 25149337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Multiple-breed genomic evaluation by principal component analysis in small size populations.
Gaspa G; Jorjani H; Dimauro C; Cellesi M; Ajmone-Marsan P; Stella A; Macciotta NP
Animal; 2015 May; 9(5):738-49. PubMed ID: 25482828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Genomic prediction of breeding values using previously estimated SNP variances.
Calus MP; Schrooten C; Veerkamp RF
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Sep; 46(1):52. PubMed ID: 25928875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Genomic prediction of breeding values for carcass traits in Nellore cattle.
Fernandes Júnior GA; Rosa GJ; Valente BD; Carvalheiro R; Baldi F; Garcia DA; Gordo DG; Espigolan R; Takada L; Tonussi RL; de Andrade WB; Magalhães AF; Chardulo LA; Tonhati H; de Albuquerque LG
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Jan; 48():7. PubMed ID: 26830208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
