161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31558151)
1. SNP-based mate allocation strategies to maximize total genetic value in pigs.
González-Diéguez D; Tusell L; Carillier-Jacquin C; Bouquet A; Vitezica ZG
Genet Sel Evol; 2019 Sep; 51(1):55. PubMed ID: 31558151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Dominance and epistatic genetic variances for litter size in pigs using genomic models.
Vitezica ZG; Reverter A; Herring W; Legarra A
Genet Sel Evol; 2018 Dec; 50(1):71. PubMed ID: 30577727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dissecting total genetic variance into additive and dominance components of purebred and crossbred pig traits.
Tusell L; Gilbert H; Vitezica ZG; Mercat MJ; Legarra A; Larzul C
Animal; 2019 Nov; 13(11):2429-2439. PubMed ID: 31120005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Genomic prediction using models with dominance and imprinting effects for backfat thickness and average daily gain in Danish Duroc pigs.
Guo X; Christensen OF; Ostersen T; Wang Y; Lund MS; Su G
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Sep; 48(1):67. PubMed ID: 27623617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Estimation of dominance variance in purebred Yorkshire swine.
Culbertson MS; Mabry JW; Misztal I; Gengler N; Bertrand JK; Varona L
J Anim Sci; 1998 Feb; 76(2):448-51. PubMed ID: 9498351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Genomic dissection of maternal, additive and non-additive genetic effects for growth and carcass traits in Nile tilapia.
Joshi R; Meuwissen THE; Woolliams JA; Gjøen HM
Genet Sel Evol; 2020 Jan; 52(1):1. PubMed ID: 31941436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impacts of additive, dominance, and inbreeding depression effects on genomic evaluation by combining two SNP chips in Canadian Yorkshire pigs bred in China.
Mei Q; Vitezica ZG; Li J; Zhao S; Legarra A; Xiang T
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Oct; 54(1):69. PubMed ID: 36273127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Estimation of dominance variance for live body weight in a crossbred population of pigs.
Dufrasne M; Faux P; Piedboeuf M; Wavreille J; Gengler N
J Anim Sci; 2014 Oct; 92(10):4313-8. PubMed ID: 25149333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Genomic evaluation by including dominance effects and inbreeding depression for purebred and crossbred performance with an application in pigs.
Xiang T; Christensen OF; Vitezica ZG; Legarra A
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Nov; 48(1):92. PubMed ID: 27887565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of nonadditive effects in yearling weight of tropical beef cattle.
Raidan FSS; Porto-Neto LR; Li Y; Lehnert SA; Vitezica ZG; Reverter A
J Anim Sci; 2018 Sep; 96(10):4028-4034. PubMed ID: 30032181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Estimating additive and non-additive genetic variances and predicting genetic merits using genome-wide dense single nucleotide polymorphism markers.
Su G; Christensen OF; Ostersen T; Henryon M; Lund MS
PLoS One; 2012; 7(9):e45293. PubMed ID: 23028912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Improved dairy cattle mating plans at herd level using genomic information.
Bérodier M; Berg P; Meuwissen T; Boichard D; Brochard M; Ducrocq V
Animal; 2021 Jan; 15(1):100016. PubMed ID: 33516018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of fitting dominance and additive effects on accuracy of genomic prediction of breeding values in layers.
Heidaritabar M; Wolc A; Arango J; Zeng J; Settar P; Fulton JE; O'Sullivan NP; Bastiaansen JW; Fernando RL; Garrick DJ; Dekkers JC
J Anim Breed Genet; 2016 Oct; 133(5):334-46. PubMed ID: 27357473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Genomic estimation of additive and dominance effects and impact of accounting for dominance on accuracy of genomic evaluation in sheep populations.
Moghaddar N; van der Werf JHJ
J Anim Breed Genet; 2017 Dec; 134(6):453-462. PubMed ID: 28833716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Estimation of additive and nonadditive genetic variances in Hereford, Gelbvieh, and Charolais by Method R.
Duangjinda M; Bertrand JK; Misztal I; Druet T
J Anim Sci; 2001 Dec; 79(12):2997-3001. PubMed ID: 11811452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Including nonadditive genetic effects in mating programs to maximize dairy farm profitability.
Aliloo H; Pryce JE; González-Recio O; Cocks BG; Goddard ME; Hayes BJ
J Dairy Sci; 2017 Feb; 100(2):1203-1222. PubMed ID: 27939540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effect of pen mates on growth, backfat depth, and longissimus muscle area of swine.
Hsu WL; Johnson RK; Van Vleck LD
J Anim Sci; 2010 Mar; 88(3):895-902. PubMed ID: 19933426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Genomic Model with Correlation Between Additive and Dominance Effects.
Xiang T; Christensen OF; Vitezica ZG; Legarra A
Genetics; 2018 Jul; 209(3):711-723. PubMed ID: 29743175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. On the additive and dominant variance and covariance of individuals within the genomic selection scope.
Vitezica ZG; Varona L; Legarra A
Genetics; 2013 Dec; 195(4):1223-30. PubMed ID: 24121775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Genomic prediction of growth in pigs based on a model including additive and dominance effects.
Lopes MS; Bastiaansen JW; Janss L; Knol EF; Bovenhuis H
J Anim Breed Genet; 2016 Jun; 133(3):180-6. PubMed ID: 26676611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
