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 *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2613571)

  • 1. Adapting best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) for timely genetic evaluation: II. Progeny traits in multiple contemporary groups within a herd.
    Lofgren DL; Harris DL; Stewart TS; Schinckel AP
    J Anim Sci; 1989 Dec; 67(12):3223-42. PubMed ID: 2613571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Adapting best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) for timely genetic evaluation: I. Progeny traits in a single contemporary group for each sex.
    Harris DL; Lofgren DL; Stewart TS; Schinckel AP
    J Anim Sci; 1989 Dec; 67(12):3209-22. PubMed ID: 2613570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A method of computing restricted best linear unbiased prediction of breeding values for some animals in a population.
    Satoh M
    J Anim Sci; 2004 Aug; 82(8):2253-8. PubMed ID: 15318721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of data structure on variance of prediction error and accuracy of genetic evaluation.
    Tosh JJ; Wilton JW
    J Anim Sci; 1994 Oct; 72(10):2568-77. PubMed ID: 7883613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Animal model and multiple trait BLUP applied in poultry genetic evaluation].
    Pang H; Wu CX; Zhang Y; Gong GF; Bi YH
    Yi Chuan Xue Bao; 1989; 16(4):291-8. PubMed ID: 2486251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Efficacy of alternative multivariate best linear unbiased prediction models for genetic evaluation of swine.
    Lofgren DL; Stewart TS
    J Anim Sci; 1991 Nov; 69(11):4388-96. PubMed ID: 1752814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of errors in pedigree on three methods of estimating breeding value for litter size, backfat and average daily gain in swine.
    Long TE; Johnson RK; Keele JW
    J Anim Sci; 1990 Dec; 68(12):4069-78. PubMed ID: 2286549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Genetic improvement programs in livestock: swine testing and genetic evaluation system (stages).
    Stewart TS; Lofgren DL; Harris DL; Einstein ME; Schinckel AP
    J Anim Sci; 1991 Sep; 69(9):3882-90. PubMed ID: 1938667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Improving genetic evaluation using a multitrait single-step genomic model for ability to resume cycling after calving, measured by activity tags in Holstein cows.
    Ismael A; Løvendahl P; Fogh A; Lund MS; Su G
    J Dairy Sci; 2017 Oct; 100(10):8188-8196. PubMed ID: 28780110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mating structures for genomic selection breeding programs in aquaculture.
    Sonesson AK; Ødegård J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Jun; 48(1):46. PubMed ID: 27342705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of culling on selection response using phenotypic selection or best linear unbiased prediction of breeding values in small, closed herds of swine.
    Kuhlers DL; Kennedy BW
    J Anim Sci; 1992 Aug; 70(8):2338-48. PubMed ID: 1506297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Characterization of best linear unbiased estimates generated from national genetic evaluations of reproductive performance, survival, and milk yield in dairy cows.
    Dunne FL; Kelleher MM; Walsh SW; Berry DP
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Aug; 101(8):7625-7637. PubMed ID: 29778473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Optimum contribution selection using traditional best linear unbiased prediction and genomic breeding values in aquaculture breeding schemes.
    Nielsen HM; Sonesson AK; Meuwissen TH
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Mar; 89(3):630-8. PubMed ID: 21036937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sire evaluation for total number born in pigs using a genomic reaction norms approach.
    Silva FF; Mulder HA; Knol EF; Lopes MS; Guimarães SE; Lopes PS; Mathur PK; Viana JM; Bastiaansen JW
    J Anim Sci; 2014 Sep; 92(9):3825-34. PubMed ID: 24492557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Pedigree information to predict genetic merit for type of Holstein bulls.
    Lee KL; Vinson WE; White JM; Norman HD; Kliewer RH
    J Dairy Sci; 1983 Oct; 66(10):2185-91. PubMed ID: 6643812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Genetic evaluation with major genes and polygenic inheritance when some animals are not genotyped using gene content multiple-trait BLUP.
    Legarra A; Vitezica ZG
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Nov; 47():89. PubMed ID: 26576649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Application of single step genomic BLUP under different uncertain paternity scenarios using simulated data.
    Tonussi RL; Silva RMO; Magalhães AFB; Espigolan R; Peripolli E; Olivieri BF; Feitosa FLB; Lemos MVA; Berton MP; Chiaia HLJ; Pereira ASC; Lôbo RB; Bezerra LAF; Magnabosco CU; Lourenço DAL; Aguilar I; Baldi F
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(9):e0181752. PubMed ID: 28957330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.