216 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35289906)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Solving efficiently large single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction models.
Strandén I; Matilainen K; Aamand GP; Mäntysaari EA
J Anim Breed Genet; 2017 Jun; 134(3):264-274. PubMed ID: 28508482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Core-dependent changes in genomic predictions using the Algorithm for Proven and Young in single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction.
Misztal I; Tsuruta S; Pocrnic I; Lourenco D
J Anim Sci; 2020 Dec; 98(12):. PubMed ID: 33211798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The quality of the algorithm for proven and young with various sets of core animals in a multibreed sheep population1.
Nilforooshan MA; Lee M
J Anim Sci; 2019 Mar; 97(3):1090-1100. PubMed ID: 30624671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Implementation of genomic recursions in single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor for US Holsteins with a large number of genotyped animals.
Masuda Y; Misztal I; Tsuruta S; Legarra A; Aguilar I; Lourenco DAL; Fragomeni BO; Lawlor TJ
J Dairy Sci; 2016 Mar; 99(3):1968-1974. PubMed ID: 26805987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. On the equivalence between marker effect models and breeding value models and direct genomic values with the Algorithm for Proven and Young.
Bermann M; Lourenco D; Forneris NS; Legarra A; Misztal I
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Jul; 54(1):52. PubMed ID: 35842585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comprehensive study on size and definition of the core group in the proven and young algorithm for single-step GBLUP.
Abdollahi-Arpanahi R; Lourenco D; Misztal I
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 May; 54(1):34. PubMed ID: 35596130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Leveraging low-density crossbred genotypes to offset crossbred phenotypes and their impact on purebred predictions.
Leite NG; Chen CY; Herring WO; Holl J; Tsuruta S; Lourenco D
J Anim Sci; 2022 Dec; 100(12):. PubMed ID: 36309902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs.
Bussiman F; Chen CY; Holl J; Bermann M; Legarra A; Misztal I; Lourenco D
J Anim Sci; 2023 Jan; 101():. PubMed ID: 37584978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Dimensionality of Genomic Information and Its Effect on Genomic Prediction.
Pocrnic I; Lourenco DA; Masuda Y; Legarra A; Misztal I
Genetics; 2016 May; 203(1):573-81. PubMed ID: 26944916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Multibreed genomic evaluation for production traits of dairy cattle in the United States using single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor.
Cesarani A; Lourenco D; Tsuruta S; Legarra A; Nicolazzi EL; VanRaden PM; Misztal I
J Dairy Sci; 2022 Jun; 105(6):5141-5152. PubMed ID: 35282922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Crossbred evaluations using single-step genomic BLUP and algorithm for proven and young with different sources of data1.
Pocrnic I; Lourenco DAL; Chen CY; Herring WO; Misztal I
J Anim Sci; 2019 Apr; 97(4):1513-1522. PubMed ID: 30726939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An efficient exact method to obtain GBLUP and single-step GBLUP when the genomic relationship matrix is singular.
Fernando RL; Cheng H; Garrick DJ
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Oct; 48(1):80. PubMed ID: 27788669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Technical note: Impact of pedigree depth on convergence of single-step genomic BLUP in a purebred swine population.
Pocrnic I; Lourenco DAL; Bradford HL; Chen CY; Misztal I
J Anim Sci; 2017 Aug; 95(8):3391-3395. PubMed ID: 28805917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Invited review: efficient computation strategies in genomic selection.
Misztal I; Legarra A
Animal; 2017 May; 11(5):731-736. PubMed ID: 27869042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Sparse single-step genomic BLUP in crossbreeding schemes.
Vandenplas J; Calus MPL; Ten Napel J
J Anim Sci; 2018 Jun; 96(6):2060-2073. PubMed ID: 29873759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Theoretical accuracy for indirect predictions based on SNP effects from single-step GBLUP.
Garcia A; Aguilar I; Legarra A; Tsuruta S; Misztal I; Lourenco D
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Sep; 54(1):66. PubMed ID: 36162979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Inclusion of sire by herd interaction effect in the genomic evaluation for weaning weight of American Angus.
Jang S; Lourenco D; Miller S
J Anim Sci; 2022 Mar; 100(3):. PubMed ID: 35213718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
