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 *

347 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31818251)

  • 1. Bias in estimates of variance components in populations undergoing genomic selection: a simulation study.
    Gao H; Madsen P; Aamand GP; Thomasen JR; Sørensen AC; Jensen J
    BMC Genomics; 2019 Dec; 20(1):956. PubMed ID: 31818251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of genomic selection and genotyping strategy on estimation of variance components in animal models using different relationship matrices.
    Wang L; Janss LL; Madsen P; Henshall J; Huang CH; Marois D; Alemu S; Sørensen AC; Jensen J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2020 Jun; 52(1):31. PubMed ID: 32527317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Short communication: Genomic prediction using different single-step methods in the Finnish red dairy cattle population.
    Gao H; Koivula M; Jensen J; Strandén I; Madsen P; Pitkänen T; Aamand GP; Mäntysaari EA
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Nov; 101(11):10082-10088. PubMed ID: 30146284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Prediction accuracy for a simulated maternally affected trait of beef cattle using different genomic evaluation models.
    Lourenco DA; Misztal I; Wang H; Aguilar I; Tsuruta S; Bertrand JK
    J Anim Sci; 2013 Sep; 91(9):4090-8. PubMed ID: 23893997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Genomic selection models double the accuracy of predicted breeding values for bacterial cold water disease resistance compared to a traditional pedigree-based model in rainbow trout aquaculture.
    Vallejo RL; Leeds TD; Gao G; Parsons JE; Martin KE; Evenhuis JP; Fragomeni BO; Wiens GD; Palti Y
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Feb; 49(1):17. PubMed ID: 28148220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Application of single step genomic BLUP under different uncertain paternity scenarios using simulated data.
    Tonussi RL; Silva RMO; Magalhães AFB; Espigolan R; Peripolli E; Olivieri BF; Feitosa FLB; Lemos MVA; Berton MP; Chiaia HLJ; Pereira ASC; Lôbo RB; Bezerra LAF; Magnabosco CU; Lourenço DAL; Aguilar I; Baldi F
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(9):e0181752. PubMed ID: 28957330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Technical note: Automatic scaling in single-step genomic BLUP.
    Bermann M; Lourenco D; Misztal I
    J Dairy Sci; 2021 Feb; 104(2):2027-2031. PubMed ID: 33309381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of alternative approaches to single-trait genomic prediction using genotyped and non-genotyped Hanwoo beef cattle.
    Lee J; Cheng H; Garrick D; Golden B; Dekkers J; Park K; Lee D; Fernando R
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Jan; 49(1):2. PubMed ID: 28093065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Differing genetic trend estimates from traditional and genomic evaluations of genotyped animals as evidence of preselection bias in US Holsteins.
    Masuda Y; VanRaden PM; Misztal I; Lawlor TJ
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Jun; 101(6):5194-5206. PubMed ID: 29573806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of variance component estimates on genomic predictions for growth and reproductive-related traits in Nellore cattle.
    Cardona-Cifuentes D; Neira JDR; Albuquerque LG; Espigolan R; Gonzalez-Herrera LG; Amorim ST; López-Correa RD; Aguilar I; Baldi F
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2024 Sep; ():. PubMed ID: 39291375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A class of Bayesian methods to combine large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals for whole-genome analyses.
    Fernando RL; Dekkers JC; Garrick DJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Sep; 46(1):50. PubMed ID: 25253441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of conventional BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP evaluations for yearling weight and carcass traits in Hanwoo beef cattle using single trait and multi-trait models.
    Mehrban H; Lee DH; Naserkheil M; Moradi MH; Ibáñez-Escriche N
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(10):e0223352. PubMed ID: 31609979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Temporal dynamics of genetic parameters and SNP effects for performance and disorder traits in poultry undergoing genomic selection.
    Richter J; Hidalgo J; Bussiman F; Breen V; Misztal I; Lourenco D
    J Anim Sci; 2024 Jan; 102():. PubMed ID: 38576313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Is single-step genomic REML with the algorithm for proven and young more computationally efficient when less generations of data are present?
    Junqueira VS; Lourenco D; Masuda Y; Cardoso FF; Lopes PS; Silva FFE; Misztal I
    J Anim Sci; 2022 May; 100(5):. PubMed ID: 35289906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Application of single-step genomic evaluation using multiple-trait random regression test-day models in dairy cattle.
    Oliveira HR; Lourenco DAL; Masuda Y; Misztal I; Tsuruta S; Jamrozik J; Brito LF; Silva FF; Schenkel FS
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 Mar; 102(3):2365-2377. PubMed ID: 30638992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Detecting effective starting point of genomic selection by divergent trends from best linear unbiased prediction and single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction in pigs, beef cattle, and broilers.
    Abdollahi-Arpanahi R; Lourenco D; Misztal I
    J Anim Sci; 2021 Sep; 99(9):. PubMed ID: 34390341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of genomic predictions for lowly heritable traits using multi-step and single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor in Holstein cattle.
    Guarini AR; Lourenco DAL; Brito LF; Sargolzaei M; Baes CF; Miglior F; Misztal I; Schenkel FS
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Sep; 101(9):8076-8086. PubMed ID: 29935829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Efficient large-scale single-step evaluations and indirect genomic prediction of genotyped selection candidates.
    Vandenplas J; Ten Napel J; Darbaghshahi SN; Evans R; Calus MPL; Veerkamp R; Cromie A; Mäntysaari EA; Strandén I
    Genet Sel Evol; 2023 Jun; 55(1):37. PubMed ID: 37291510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.