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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26558877)

  • 1. Two molecular measures of relatedness based on haplotype sharing.
    Edwards D
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2015 Nov; 16():383. PubMed ID: 26558877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Genomic Variation of Inbreeding and Ancestry in the Remaining Two Isle Royale Wolves.
    Hedrick PW; Kardos M; Peterson RO; Vucetich JA
    J Hered; 2017 Mar; 108(2):120-126. PubMed ID: 27940471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Relatedness in the post-genomic era: is it still useful?
    Speed D; Balding DJ
    Nat Rev Genet; 2015 Jan; 16(1):33-44. PubMed ID: 25404112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fast and Accurate Shared Segment Detection and Relatedness Estimation in Un-phased Genetic Data via TRUFFLE.
    Dimitromanolakis A; Paterson AD; Sun L
    Am J Hum Genet; 2019 Jul; 105(1):78-88. PubMed ID: 31178127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Compression distance can discriminate animals by genetic profile, build relationship matrices and estimate breeding values.
    Hudson NJ; Porto-Neto L; Kijas JW; Reverter A
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Oct; 47():78. PubMed ID: 26464167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Do stronger measures of genomic connectedness enhance prediction accuracies across management units?
    Yu H; Spangler ML; Lewis RM; Morota G
    J Anim Sci; 2018 Nov; 96(11):4490-4500. PubMed ID: 30165381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Genomic prediction based on data from three layer lines: a comparison between linear methods.
    Calus MP; Huang H; Vereijken A; Visscher J; Ten Napel J; Windig JJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Oct; 46(1):57. PubMed ID: 25927219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of genomic selection for a sib-evaluated trait using identity-by-state and identity-by-descent relationships.
    Vela-Avitúa S; Meuwissen TH; Luan T; Ødegård J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Feb; 47(1):9. PubMed ID: 25888184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pedigrees or markers: Which are better in estimating relatedness and inbreeding coefficient?
    Wang J
    Theor Popul Biol; 2016 Feb; 107():4-13. PubMed ID: 26344786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Genomic predictions based on animal models using genotype imputation on a national scale in Norwegian Red cattle.
    Meuwissen TH; Svendsen M; Solberg T; Ødegård J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Oct; 47():79. PubMed ID: 26464226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Inference of relationships in population data using identity-by-descent and identity-by-state.
    Stevens EL; Heckenberg G; Roberson ED; Baugher JD; Downey TJ; Pevsner J
    PLoS Genet; 2011 Sep; 7(9):e1002287. PubMed ID: 21966277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Estimating quantitative genetic parameters in wild populations: a comparison of pedigree and genomic approaches.
    Bérénos C; Ellis PA; Pilkington JG; Pemberton JM
    Mol Ecol; 2014 Jul; 23(14):3434-51. PubMed ID: 24917482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Weighting genomic and genealogical information for genetic parameter estimation and breeding value prediction in tropical beef cattle.
    Raidan FSS; Porto-Neto LR; Li Y; Lehnert SA; Reverter A
    J Anim Sci; 2018 Mar; 96(2):612-617. PubMed ID: 29385460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy of genomic breeding values revisited: Assessment of two established approaches and a novel one to determine the accuracy in two-step genomic prediction.
    Ni G; Kipp S; Simianer H; Erbe M
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2017 Jun; 134(3):242-255. PubMed ID: 28508487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Genomic prediction of genetic merit using LD-based haplotypes in the Nordic Holstein population.
    Cuyabano BC; Su G; Lund MS
    BMC Genomics; 2014 Dec; 15(1):1171. PubMed ID: 25539631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A note on the rationale for estimating genealogical coancestry from molecular markers.
    Toro MA; García-Cortés LA; Legarra A
    Genet Sel Evol; 2011 Jul; 43(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 21749687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle.
    van Binsbergen R; Calus MP; Bink MC; van Eeuwijk FA; Schrooten C; Veerkamp RF
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Sep; 47(1):71. PubMed ID: 26381777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing genome-based estimates of relatedness for use in pedigree-based conservation management.
    Hauser SS; Galla SJ; Putnam AS; Steeves TE; Latch EK
    Mol Ecol Resour; 2022 Oct; 22(7):2546-2558. PubMed ID: 35510790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. PADRE: Pedigree-Aware Distant-Relationship Estimation.
    Staples J; Witherspoon DJ; Jorde LB; Nickerson DA; ; Below JE; Huff CD
    Am J Hum Genet; 2016 Jul; 99(1):154-62. PubMed ID: 27374771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.