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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32561956)

  • 1. Expectation and variance of the estimator of the maximized selection response of linear selection indices with normal distribution.
    Cerón-Rojas JJ; Crossa J
    Theor Appl Genet; 2020 Sep; 133(9):2743-2758. PubMed ID: 32561956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The statistical theory of linear selection indices from phenotypic to genomic selection.
    Cerón-Rojas JJ; Crossa J
    Crop Sci; 2022; 62(2):537-563. PubMed ID: 35911794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Combined Multistage Linear Genomic Selection Indices To Predict the Net Genetic Merit in Plant Breeding.
    Cerón-Rojas JJ; Crossa J
    G3 (Bethesda); 2020 Jun; 10(6):2087-2101. PubMed ID: 32312840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Efficiency of a Constrained Linear Genomic Selection Index To Predict the Net Genetic Merit in Plants.
    Cerón-Rojas JJ; Crossa J
    G3 (Bethesda); 2019 Dec; 9(12):3981-3994. PubMed ID: 31570501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Genomic Selection Index Applied to Simulated and Real Data.
    Ceron-Rojas JJ; Crossa J; Arief VN; Basford K; Rutkoski J; Jarquín D; Alvarado G; Beyene Y; Semagn K; DeLacy I
    G3 (Bethesda); 2015 Aug; 5(10):2155-64. PubMed ID: 26290571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Genetic Gain Increases by Applying the Usefulness Criterion with Improved Variance Prediction in Selection of Crosses.
    Lehermeier C; Teyssèdre S; Schön CC
    Genetics; 2017 Dec; 207(4):1651-1661. PubMed ID: 29038144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The efficiency of genome-wide selection for genetic improvement of net merit.
    Togashi K; Lin CY; Yamazaki T
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Oct; 89(10):2972-80. PubMed ID: 21512116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Evaluation criterion for response to selection with constraint.
    Satoh M
    Anim Sci J; 2019 Apr; 90(4):462-466. PubMed ID: 30723993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A fast genomic selection approach for large genomic data.
    Liu H; Chen GB
    Theor Appl Genet; 2017 Jun; 130(6):1277-1284. PubMed ID: 28389770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. How informative is Wright's estimator of the number of genes affecting a quantitative character?
    Zeng ZB; Houle D; Cockerham CC
    Genetics; 1990 Sep; 126(1):235-47. PubMed ID: 2227383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An alternative covariance estimator to investigate genetic heterogeneity in populations.
    Heslot N; Jannink JL
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Nov; 47():93. PubMed ID: 26612537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Analysis of selection experiments using mixed model methodology.
    Sorensen DA; Kennedy BW
    J Anim Sci; 1986 Jul; 63(1):245-58. PubMed ID: 3733573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Computer simulation of selection in a hypothetical crop species.
    Partner PL; Smith ML; Spoor W; Clarkson MI
    Comput Appl Biosci; 1993 Oct; 9(5):597-605. PubMed ID: 8293334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Optimum and Decorrelated Constrained Multistage Linear Phenotypic Selection Indices Theory.
    Cerón-Rojas JJ; Toledo FH; Crossa J
    Crop Sci; 2019; 59():2585-2600. PubMed ID: 33343016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sensitivity of methods for estimating breeding values using genetic markers to the number of QTL and distribution of QTL variance.
    Coster A; Bastiaansen JW; Calus MP; van Arendonk JA; Bovenhuis H
    Genet Sel Evol; 2010 Mar; 42(1):9. PubMed ID: 20302681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of genomic information on optimal contribution selection in livestock breeding programs.
    Clark SA; Kinghorn BP; Hickey JM; van der Werf JH
    Genet Sel Evol; 2013 Oct; 45(1):44. PubMed ID: 24171942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Genomic selection in dairy cattle simulated populations.
    Seno LO; Guidolin DGF; Aspilcueta-Borquis RR; Nascimento GBD; Silva TBRD; Oliveira HN; Munari DP
    J Dairy Res; 2018 May; 85(2):125-132. PubMed ID: 29785919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Genomic selection for non-key traits in radiata pine when the documented pedigree is corrected using DNA marker information.
    Li Y; Klápště J; Telfer E; Wilcox P; Graham N; Macdonald L; Dungey HS
    BMC Genomics; 2019 Dec; 20(1):1026. PubMed ID: 31881838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.