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 *

301 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32980863)

  • 1. Efficient weighting methods for genomic best linear-unbiased prediction (BLUP) adapted to the genetic architectures of quantitative traits.
    Ren D; An L; Li B; Qiao L; Liu W
    Heredity (Edinb); 2021 Feb; 126(2):320-334. PubMed ID: 32980863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Performances of Adaptive MultiBLUP, Bayesian regressions, and weighted-GBLUP approaches for genomic predictions in Belgian Blue beef cattle.
    Gualdrón Duarte JL; Gori AS; Hubin X; Lourenco D; Charlier C; Misztal I; Druet T
    BMC Genomics; 2020 Aug; 21(1):545. PubMed ID: 32762654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of genomic predictions using genomic relationship matrices built with different weighting factors to account for locus-specific variances.
    Su G; Christensen OF; Janss L; Lund MS
    J Dairy Sci; 2014 Oct; 97(10):6547-59. PubMed ID: 25129495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. An efficient unified model for genome-wide association studies and genomic selection.
    Li H; Su G; Jiang L; Bao Z
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Aug; 49(1):64. PubMed ID: 28836943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accounting for trait architecture in genomic predictions of US Holstein cattle using a weighted realized relationship matrix.
    Tiezzi F; Maltecca C
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Apr; 47(1):24. PubMed ID: 25886167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Genomic Prediction Using Multi-trait Weighted GBLUP Accounting for Heterogeneous Variances and Covariances Across the Genome.
    Karaman E; Lund MS; Anche MT; Janss L; Su G
    G3 (Bethesda); 2018 Nov; 8(11):3549-3558. PubMed ID: 30194089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. GWABLUP: genome-wide association assisted best linear unbiased prediction of genetic values.
    Meuwissen T; Eikje LS; Gjuvsland AB
    Genet Sel Evol; 2024 Mar; 56(1):17. PubMed ID: 38429665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of whole-genome prediction using a genetic architecture-enhanced variance-covariance matrix.
    Zhang Z; Erbe M; He J; Ober U; Gao N; Zhang H; Simianer H; Li J
    G3 (Bethesda); 2015 Feb; 5(4):615-27. PubMed ID: 25670771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using markers with large effect in genetic and genomic predictions.
    Lopes MS; Bovenhuis H; van Son M; Nordbø Ø; Grindflek EH; Knol EF; Bastiaansen JW
    J Anim Sci; 2017 Jan; 95(1):59-71. PubMed ID: 28177367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A Multiple-Trait Bayesian Lasso for Genome-Enabled Analysis and Prediction of Complex Traits.
    Gianola D; Fernando RL
    Genetics; 2020 Feb; 214(2):305-331. PubMed ID: 31879318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Expanding the BLUP alphabet for genomic prediction adaptable to the genetic architectures of complex traits.
    Wang J; Zhou Z; Zhang Z; Li H; Liu D; Zhang Q; Bradbury PJ; Buckler ES; Zhang Z
    Heredity (Edinb); 2018 Dec; 121(6):648-662. PubMed ID: 29765161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Performance of Bayesian and BLUP alphabets for genomic prediction: analysis, comparison and results.
    Meher PK; Rustgi S; Kumar A
    Heredity (Edinb); 2022 Jun; 128(6):519-530. PubMed ID: 35508540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Different models of genetic variation and their effect on genomic evaluation.
    Clark SA; Hickey JM; van der Werf JH
    Genet Sel Evol; 2011 May; 43(1):18. PubMed ID: 21575265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Genomic Prediction Using Alternative Strategies of Weighted Single-Step Genomic BLUP for Yearling Weight and Carcass Traits in Hanwoo Beef Cattle.
    Mehrban H; Naserkheil M; Lee DH; Cho C; Choi T; Park M; Ibáñez-Escriche N
    Genes (Basel); 2021 Feb; 12(2):. PubMed ID: 33673102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Genomic prediction based on selective linkage disequilibrium pruning of low-coverage whole-genome sequence variants in a pure Duroc population.
    Zhu D; Zhao Y; Zhang R; Wu H; Cai G; Wu Z; Wang Y; Hu X
    Genet Sel Evol; 2023 Oct; 55(1):72. PubMed ID: 37853325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. GWAS by GBLUP: Single and Multimarker EMMAX and Bayes Factors, with an Example in Detection of a Major Gene for Horse Gait.
    Legarra A; Ricard A; Varona L
    G3 (Bethesda); 2018 Jul; 8(7):2301-2308. PubMed ID: 29748199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact of prior specifications in a shrinkage-inducing Bayesian model for quantitative trait mapping and genomic prediction.
    Knürr T; Läärä E; Sillanpää MJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2013 Jul; 45(1):24. PubMed ID: 23834140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. deepGBLUP: joint deep learning networks and GBLUP framework for accurate genomic prediction of complex traits in Korean native cattle.
    Lee HJ; Lee JH; Gondro C; Koh YJ; Lee SH
    Genet Sel Evol; 2023 Jul; 55(1):56. PubMed ID: 37525091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Weighted Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Prediction for Carcass Traits in Hanwoo Cattle.
    Lopez BI; Lee SH; Park JE; Shin DH; Oh JD; de Las Heras-Saldana S; van der Werf J; Chai HH; Park W; Lim D
    Genes (Basel); 2019 Dec; 10(12):. PubMed ID: 31817753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Use of a Bayesian model including QTL markers increases prediction reliability when test animals are distant from the reference population.
    Ma P; Lund MS; Aamand GP; Su G
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 Aug; 102(8):7237-7247. PubMed ID: 31155255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.