601 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27076192)
1. Multi-generational imputation of single nucleotide polymorphism marker genotypes and accuracy of genomic selection.
Toghiani S; Aggrey SE; Rekaya R
Animal; 2016 Jul; 10(7):1077-85. PubMed ID: 27076192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The impact of multi-generational genotype imputation strategies on imputation accuracy and subsequent genomic predictions.
Judge MM; Purfield DC; Sleator RD; Berry DP
J Anim Sci; 2017 Apr; 95(4):1489-1501. PubMed ID: 28464096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Genotype imputation from various low-density SNP panels and its impact on accuracy of genomic breeding values in pigs.
Grossi DA; Brito LF; Jafarikia M; Schenkel FS; Feng Z
Animal; 2018 Nov; 12(11):2235-2245. PubMed ID: 29706144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Design of a low-density SNP chip for the main Australian sheep breeds and its effect on imputation and genomic prediction accuracy.
Bolormaa S; Gore K; van der Werf JH; Hayes BJ; Daetwyler HD
Anim Genet; 2015 Oct; 46(5):544-56. PubMed ID: 26360638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The feasibility of using low-density marker panels for genotype imputation and genomic prediction of crossbred dairy cattle of East Africa.
Aliloo H; Mrode R; Okeyo AM; Ni G; Goddard ME; Gibson JP
J Dairy Sci; 2018 Oct; 101(10):9108-9127. PubMed ID: 30077450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Genotype Imputation to Improve the Cost-Efficiency of Genomic Selection in Rabbits.
Mancin E; Sosa-Madrid BS; Blasco A; Ibáñez-Escriche N
Animals (Basel); 2021 Mar; 11(3):. PubMed ID: 33805619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Imputation of genotypes from low density (50,000 markers) to high density (700,000 markers) of cows from research herds in Europe, North America, and Australasia using 2 reference populations.
Pryce JE; Johnston J; Hayes BJ; Sahana G; Weigel KA; McParland S; Spurlock D; Krattenmacher N; Spelman RJ; Wall E; Calus MP
J Dairy Sci; 2014 Mar; 97(3):1799-811. PubMed ID: 24472132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Genotype Imputation To Improve the Cost-Efficiency of Genomic Selection in Farmed Atlantic Salmon.
Tsai HY; Matika O; Edwards SM; Antolín-Sánchez R; Hamilton A; Guy DR; Tinch AE; Gharbi K; Stear MJ; Taggart JB; Bron JE; Hickey JM; Houston RD
G3 (Bethesda); 2017 Apr; 7(4):1377-1383. PubMed ID: 28250015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Practical implementation of cost-effective genomic selection in commercial pig breeding using imputation.
Cleveland MA; Hickey JM
J Anim Sci; 2013 Aug; 91(8):3583-92. PubMed ID: 23736050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Imputation of missing single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes using a multivariate mixed model framework.
Calus MP; Veerkamp RF; Mulder HA
J Anim Sci; 2011 Jul; 89(7):2042-9. PubMed ID: 21357451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assets of imputation to ultra-high density for productive and functional traits.
Jiménez-Montero JA; Gianola D; Weigel K; Alenda R; González-Recio O
J Dairy Sci; 2013 Sep; 96(9):6047-58. PubMed ID: 23810591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Accuracy of genotype imputation based on random and selected reference sets in purebred and crossbred sheep populations and its effect on accuracy of genomic prediction.
Moghaddar N; Gore KP; Daetwyler HD; Hayes BJ; van der Werf JH
Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Dec; 47():97. PubMed ID: 26694131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The impact of reducing the frequency of animals genotyped at higher density on imputation and prediction accuracies using ssGBLUP1.
Sollero BP; Howard JT; Spangler ML
J Anim Sci; 2019 Jul; 97(7):2780-2792. PubMed ID: 31115442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of measures of correctness of genotype imputation in the context of genomic prediction: a review of livestock applications.
Calus MP; Bouwman AC; Hickey JM; Veerkamp RF; Mulder HA
Animal; 2014 Nov; 8(11):1743-53. PubMed ID: 25045914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Genomic selection using low density marker panels with application to a sire line in pigs.
Wellmann R; Preuß S; Tholen E; Heinkel J; Wimmers K; Bennewitz J
Genet Sel Evol; 2013 Jul; 45(1):28. PubMed ID: 23895218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing technologies as an alternative to low-density SNP chips for genomic selection: a simulation study in layer chickens.
Herry F; Hérault F; Lecerf F; Lagoutte L; Doublet M; Picard-Druet D; Bardou P; Varenne A; Burlot T; Le Roy P; Allais S
BMC Genomics; 2023 May; 24(1):271. PubMed ID: 37208589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of developed low-density genotype panels for imputation to higher density in independent dairy and beef cattle populations.
Judge MM; Kearney JF; McClure MC; Sleator RD; Berry DP
J Anim Sci; 2016 Mar; 94(3):949-62. PubMed ID: 27065257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of genotype imputation in sheep breeds.
Hayes BJ; Bowman PJ; Daetwyler HD; Kijas JW; van der Werf JH
Anim Genet; 2012 Feb; 43(1):72-80. PubMed ID: 22221027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Strategies and utility of imputed SNP genotypes for genomic analysis in dairy cattle.
Khatkar MS; Moser G; Hayes BJ; Raadsma HW
BMC Genomics; 2012 Oct; 13():538. PubMed ID: 23043356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Accuracy of estimation of genomic breeding values in pigs using low-density genotypes and imputation.
Badke YM; Bates RO; Ernst CW; Fix J; Steibel JP
G3 (Bethesda); 2014 Apr; 4(4):623-31. PubMed ID: 24531728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
