137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31481013)
1. Economic optimization of full-sib test group size and genotyping effort in a breeding program for Atlantic salmon.
Janssen K; Saatkamp HW; Calus MPL; Komen H
Genet Sel Evol; 2019 Sep; 51(1):49. PubMed ID: 31481013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Optimizing Low-Cost Genotyping and Imputation Strategies for Genomic Selection in Atlantic Salmon.
Tsairidou S; Hamilton A; Robledo D; Bron JE; Houston RD
G3 (Bethesda); 2020 Feb; 10(2):581-590. PubMed ID: 31826882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Identity-by-descent genomic selection using selective and sparse genotyping.
Odegård J; Meuwissen TH
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jan; 46(1):3. PubMed ID: 24444432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Genomic predictions can accelerate selection for resistance against Piscirickettsia salmonis in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).
Bangera R; Correa K; Lhorente JP; Figueroa R; Yáñez JM
BMC Genomics; 2017 Jan; 18(1):121. PubMed ID: 28143402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A low-marker density implementation of genomic selection in aquaculture using within-family genomic breeding values.
Lillehammer M; Meuwissen TH; Sonesson AK
Genet Sel Evol; 2013 Oct; 45(1):39. PubMed ID: 24127852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Economic aspects of implementing genomic evaluations in a pig sire line breeding scheme.
Tribout T; Larzul C; Phocas F
Genet Sel Evol; 2013 Oct; 45(1):40. PubMed ID: 24127883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Genomic prediction of host resistance to sea lice in farmed Atlantic salmon populations.
Tsai HY; Hamilton A; Tinch AE; Guy DR; Bron JE; Taggart JB; Gharbi K; Stear M; Matika O; Pong-Wong R; Bishop SC; Houston RD
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Jun; 48(1):47. PubMed ID: 27357694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The impact of selective genotyping on the response to selection using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction.
Howard JT; Rathje TA; Bruns CE; Wilson-Wells DF; Kachman SD; Spangler ML
J Anim Sci; 2018 Nov; 96(11):4532-4542. PubMed ID: 30107560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Identity-by-descent genomic selection using selective and sparse genotyping for binary traits.
Ødegård J; Meuwissen TH
Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Feb; 47(1):8. PubMed ID: 25888522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Genomic selection for two traits in a maternal pig breeding scheme.
Lillehammer M; Meuwissen TH; Sonesson AK
J Anim Sci; 2013 Jul; 91(7):3079-87. PubMed ID: 23658351
[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. Imputation of non-genotyped F1 dams to improve genetic gain in swine crossbreeding programs.
See GM; Fix JS; Schwab CR; Spangler ML
J Anim Sci; 2022 May; 100(5):. PubMed ID: 35451025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Genomic selection for maternal traits in pigs.
Lillehammer M; Meuwissen TH; Sonesson AK
J Anim Sci; 2011 Dec; 89(12):3908-16. PubMed ID: 21841086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Optimizing the allocation of resources for genomic selection in one breeding cycle.
Riedelsheimer C; Melchinger AE
Theor Appl Genet; 2013 Nov; 126(11):2835-48. PubMed ID: 23982591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Most of the benefits from genomic selection can be realized by genotyping a small proportion of available selection candidates.
Henryon M; Berg P; Ostersen T; Nielsen B; Sørensen AC
J Anim Sci; 2012 Dec; 90(13):4681-9. PubMed ID: 23087087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessment of alternative genotyping strategies to maximize imputation accuracy at minimal cost.
Huang Y; Hickey JM; Cleveland MA; Maltecca C
Genet Sel Evol; 2012 Jul; 44(1):25. PubMed ID: 22849718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Economic evaluation of genomic selection in small ruminants: a sheep meat breeding program.
Shumbusho F; Raoul J; Astruc JM; Palhiere I; Lemarié S; Fugeray-Scarbel A; Elsen JM
Animal; 2016 Jun; 10(6):1033-41. PubMed ID: 26446712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
