463 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27235308)
1. Genomic Prediction for Quantitative Traits Is Improved by Mapping Variants to Gene Ontology Categories in Drosophila melanogaster.
Edwards SM; Sørensen IF; Sarup P; Mackay TF; Sørensen P
Genetics; 2016 Aug; 203(4):1871-83. PubMed ID: 27235308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Exploring the genetic architecture and improving genomic prediction accuracy for mastitis and milk production traits in dairy cattle by mapping variants to hepatic transcriptomic regions responsive to intra-mammary infection.
Fang L; Sahana G; Ma P; Su G; Yu Y; Zhang S; Lund MS; Sørensen P
Genet Sel Evol; 2017 May; 49(1):44. PubMed ID: 28499345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Multiple Trait Covariance Association Test Identifies Gene Ontology Categories Associated with Chill Coma Recovery Time in Drosophila melanogaster.
Sørensen IF; Edwards SM; Rohde PD; Sørensen P
Sci Rep; 2017 May; 7(1):2413. PubMed ID: 28546557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Use of biological priors enhances understanding of genetic architecture and genomic prediction of complex traits within and between dairy cattle breeds.
Fang L; Sahana G; Ma P; Su G; Yu Y; Zhang S; Lund MS; Sørensen P
BMC Genomics; 2017 Aug; 18(1):604. PubMed ID: 28797230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reliability of genomic prediction for milk fatty acid composition by using a multi-population reference and incorporating GWAS results.
Gebreyesus G; Bovenhuis H; Lund MS; Poulsen NA; Sun D; Buitenhuis B
Genet Sel Evol; 2019 Apr; 51(1):16. PubMed ID: 31029078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Using whole-genome sequence data to predict quantitative trait phenotypes in Drosophila melanogaster.
Ober U; Ayroles JF; Stone EA; Richards S; Zhu D; Gibbs RA; Stricker C; Gianola D; Schlather M; Mackay TF; Simianer H
PLoS Genet; 2012; 8(5):e1002685. PubMed ID: 22570636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Leveraging Multiple Layers of Data To Predict
Morgante F; Huang W; Sørensen P; Maltecca C; Mackay TFC
G3 (Bethesda); 2020 Dec; 10(12):4599-4613. PubMed ID: 33106232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Increased prediction accuracy using a genomic feature model including prior information on quantitative trait locus regions in purebred Danish Duroc pigs.
Sarup P; Jensen J; Ostersen T; Henryon M; Sørensen P
BMC Genet; 2016 Jan; 17():11. PubMed ID: 26728402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accounting for genetic architecture improves sequence based genomic prediction for a Drosophila fitness trait.
Ober U; Huang W; Magwire M; Schlather M; Simianer H; Mackay TF
PLoS One; 2015; 10(5):e0126880. PubMed ID: 25950439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Multi-omics-data-assisted genomic feature markers preselection improves the accuracy of genomic prediction.
Ye S; Li J; Zhang Z
J Anim Sci Biotechnol; 2020 Dec; 11(1):109. PubMed ID: 33292577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Exploiting biological priors and sequence variants enhances QTL discovery and genomic prediction of complex traits.
MacLeod IM; Bowman PJ; Vander Jagt CJ; Haile-Mariam M; Kemper KE; Chamberlain AJ; Schrooten C; Hayes BJ; Goddard ME
BMC Genomics; 2016 Feb; 17():144. PubMed ID: 26920147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. The road less traveled: from genotype to phenotype in flies and humans.
Anholt RRH; Mackay TFC
Mamm Genome; 2018 Feb; 29(1-2):5-23. PubMed ID: 29058036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of genetic architecture on the prediction accuracy of quantitative traits in samples of unrelated individuals.
Morgante F; Huang W; Maltecca C; Mackay TFC
Heredity (Edinb); 2018 Jun; 120(6):500-514. PubMed ID: 29426878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. The Drosophila melanogaster Genetic Reference Panel.
Mackay TF; Richards S; Stone EA; Barbadilla A; Ayroles JF; Zhu D; Casillas S; Han Y; Magwire MM; Cridland JM; Richardson MF; Anholt RR; Barrón M; Bess C; Blankenburg KP; Carbone MA; Castellano D; Chaboub L; Duncan L; Harris Z; Javaid M; Jayaseelan JC; Jhangiani SN; Jordan KW; Lara F; Lawrence F; Lee SL; Librado P; Linheiro RS; Lyman RF; Mackey AJ; Munidasa M; Muzny DM; Nazareth L; Newsham I; Perales L; Pu LL; Qu C; Ràmia M; Reid JG; Rollmann SM; Rozas J; Saada N; Turlapati L; Worley KC; Wu YQ; Yamamoto A; Zhu Y; Bergman CM; Thornton KR; Mittelman D; Gibbs RA
Nature; 2012 Feb; 482(7384):173-8. PubMed ID: 22318601
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Dissecting genetic architecture of startle response in Drosophila melanogaster using multi-omics information.
Xue A; Wang H; Zhu J
Sci Rep; 2017 Sep; 7(1):12367. PubMed ID: 28959013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
