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 *

361 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31286868)

  • 1. Pedigree relationships to control inbreeding in optimum-contribution selection realise more genetic gain than genomic relationships.
    Henryon M; Liu H; Berg P; Su G; Nielsen HM; Gebregiwergis GT; Sørensen AC
    Genet Sel Evol; 2019 Jul; 51(1):39. PubMed ID: 31286868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Pre-selection against a lethal recessive allele in breeding schemes with optimum-contribution selection or truncation selection.
    Hjortø L; Henryon M; Liu H; Berg P; Thomasen JR; Sørensen AC
    Genet Sel Evol; 2021 Sep; 53(1):75. PubMed ID: 34551728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Controlling Coancestry and Thereby Future Inbreeding by Optimum-Contribution Selection Using Alternative Genomic-Relationship Matrices.
    Gebregiwergis GT; Sørensen AC; Henryon M; Meuwissen T
    Front Genet; 2020; 11():345. PubMed ID: 32425971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Mating strategies with genomic information reduce rates of inbreeding in animal breeding schemes without compromising genetic gain.
    Liu H; Henryon M; Sørensen AC
    Animal; 2017 Apr; 11(4):547-555. PubMed ID: 27531662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Genomic selection requires genomic control of inbreeding.
    Sonesson AK; Woolliams JA; Meuwissen TH
    Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Aug; 44(1):27. PubMed ID: 22898324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Marker-assisted selection can reduce true as well as pedigree-estimated inbreeding.
    Pedersen LD; Sørensen AC; Berg P
    J Dairy Sci; 2009 May; 92(5):2214-23. PubMed ID: 19389980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Allele frequency changes due to hitch-hiking in genomic selection programs.
    Liu H; Sørensen AC; Meuwissen TH; Berg P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Feb; 46(1):8. PubMed ID: 24495634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Trends in genome-wide and region-specific genetic diversity in the Dutch-Flemish Holstein-Friesian breeding program from 1986 to 2015.
    Doekes HP; Veerkamp RF; Bijma P; Hiemstra SJ; Windig JJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2018 Apr; 50(1):15. PubMed ID: 29642838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Long-term impact of conventional and optimal contribution conservation methods on genetic diversity and genetic gain in local pig breeds.
    Zhao Q; Liu H; Qadri QR; Wang Q; Pan Y; Su G
    Heredity (Edinb); 2021 Dec; 127(6):546-553. PubMed ID: 34750534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Impact of kinship matrices on genetic gain and inbreeding with optimum contribution selection in a genomic dairy cattle breeding program.
    Gautason E; Sahana G; Guldbrandtsen B; Berg P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2023 Jul; 55(1):48. PubMed ID: 37460999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Marker-assisted selection reduces expected inbreeding but can result in large effects of hitchhiking.
    Pedersen LD; Sørensen AC; Berg P
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2010 Jun; 127(3):189-98. PubMed ID: 20536636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Genomic mating as sustainable breeding for Chinese indigenous Ningxiang pigs.
    He J; Wu XL; Zeng Q; Li H; Ma H; Jiang J; Rosa GJM; Gianola D; Tait RG; Bauck S
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0236629. PubMed ID: 32797113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Genotyping more cows increases genetic gain and reduces rate of true inbreeding in a dairy cattle breeding scheme using female reproductive technologies.
    Thomasen JR; Liu H; Sørensen AC
    J Dairy Sci; 2020 Jan; 103(1):597-606. PubMed ID: 31733861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Most of the long-term genetic gain from optimum-contribution selection can be realised with restrictions imposed during optimisation.
    Henryon M; Ostersen T; Ask B; Sørensen AC; Berg P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Mar; 47(1):21. PubMed ID: 25887703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Simulation study on the efficiencies of MOET nucleus breeding schemes applying marker assisted selection in dairy cattle.
    Luo W; Wang Y; Zhang Y
    Sci China C Life Sci; 2009 Mar; 52(3):296-306. PubMed ID: 19294355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Maximizing genetic gain over multiple generations with quantitative trait locus selection and control of inbreeding.
    Villanueva B; Dekkers JC; Woolliams JA; Settar P
    J Anim Sci; 2004 May; 82(5):1305-14. PubMed ID: 15144069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Long-term response to genomic selection: effects of estimation method and reference population structure for different genetic architectures.
    Bastiaansen JW; Coster A; Calus MP; van Arendonk JA; Bovenhuis H
    Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Jan; 44(1):3. PubMed ID: 22273519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of selection and selective genotyping for creation of reference on bias and accuracy of genomic prediction.
    Gowane GR; Lee SH; Clark S; Moghaddar N; Al-Mamun HA; van der Werf JHJ
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2019 Sep; 136(5):390-407. PubMed ID: 31215699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.