236 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32674271)
1. Single-Step Genomic Evaluations from Theory to Practice: Using SNP Chips and Sequence Data in BLUPF90.
Lourenco D; Legarra A; Tsuruta S; Masuda Y; Aguilar I; Misztal I
Genes (Basel); 2020 Jul; 11(7):. PubMed ID: 32674271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Experiences with a single-step genome evaluation.
Misztal I; Aggrey SE; Muir WM
Poult Sci; 2013 Sep; 92(9):2530-4. PubMed ID: 23960138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improving the accuracy of genomic evaluation for linear body measurement traits using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction in Hanwoo beef cattle.
Naserkheil M; Lee DH; Mehrban H
BMC Genet; 2020 Dec; 21(1):144. PubMed ID: 33267771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Development of genomic predictions for Angus cattle in Brazil incorporating genotypes from related American sires.
Campos GS; Cardoso FF; Gomes CCG; Domingues R; de Almeida Regitano LC; de Sena Oliveira MC; de Oliveira HN; Carvalheiro R; Albuquerque LG; Miller S; Misztal I; Lourenco D
J Anim Sci; 2022 Feb; 100(2):. PubMed ID: 35031806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Empirical comparison between different methods for genomic prediction of number of piglets born alive in moderate sized breeding populations.
Fangmann A; Sharifi RA; Heinkel J; Danowski K; Schrade H; Erbe M; Simianer H
J Anim Sci; 2017 Apr; 95(4):1434-1443. PubMed ID: 28464085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Extension of the reduced animal model to single-step methods.
Nilforooshan MA
J Anim Sci; 2023 Jan; 101():. PubMed ID: 36069946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Efficient approximation of reliabilities for single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor models with the Algorithm for Proven and Young.
Bermann M; Lourenco D; Misztal I
J Anim Sci; 2022 Jan; 100(1):. PubMed ID: 34877603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Current status of genomic evaluation.
Misztal I; Lourenco D; Legarra A
J Anim Sci; 2020 Apr; 98(4):. PubMed ID: 32267923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Genomic selection in American mink (Neovison vison) using a single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction model for size and quality traits graded on live mink.
Villumsen TM; Su G; Guldbrandtsen B; Asp T; Lund MS
J Anim Sci; 2021 Jan; 99(1):. PubMed ID: 33515480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Short communication: Single-step genomic evaluation of milk production traits using multiple-trait random regression model in Chinese Holsteins.
Kang H; Ning C; Zhou L; Zhang S; Yan Q; Liu JF
J Dairy Sci; 2018 Dec; 101(12):11143-11149. PubMed ID: 30268613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Indirect predictions with a large number of genotyped animals using the algorithm for proven and young.
Garcia ALS; Masuda Y; Tsuruta S; Miller S; Misztal I; Lourenco D
J Anim Sci; 2020 Jun; 98(6):. PubMed ID: 32374831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Methods for genomic evaluation of a relatively small genotyped dairy population and effect of genotyped cow information in multiparity analyses.
Lourenco DA; Misztal I; Tsuruta S; Aguilar I; Ezra E; Ron M; Shirak A; Weller JI
J Dairy Sci; 2014 Mar; 97(3):1742-52. PubMed ID: 24472123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of genomic evaluation with weighted single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction for milk production traits, udder type traits, and somatic cell scores in French dairy goats.
Teissier M; Larroque H; Robert-Granie C
J Dairy Sci; 2019 Apr; 102(4):3142-3154. PubMed ID: 30712939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Breeding value reliabilities for multiple-trait single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor.
Ben Zaabza H; Taskinen M; Mäntysaari EA; Pitkänen T; Aamand GP; Strandén I
J Dairy Sci; 2022 Jun; 105(6):5221-5237. PubMed ID: 35400498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
