332 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35870886)
61. Modeling heterogeneous (co)variances from adjacent-SNP groups improves genomic prediction for milk protein composition traits.
Gebreyesus G; Lund MS; Buitenhuis B; Bovenhuis H; Poulsen NA; Janss LG
Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Dec; 49(1):89. PubMed ID: 29207947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. Multi-Trait Single-Step GBLUP Improves Accuracy of Genomic Prediction for Carcass Traits Using Yearling Weight and Ultrasound Traits in Hanwoo.
Mehrban H; Naserkheil M; Lee D; Ibáñez-Escriche N
Front Genet; 2021; 12():692356. PubMed ID: 34394186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Genomic Prediction and Association Mapping of Curd-Related Traits in Gene Bank Accessions of Cauliflower.
Thorwarth P; Yousef EAA; Schmid KJ
G3 (Bethesda); 2018 Feb; 8(2):707-718. PubMed ID: 29255118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Population structure of a lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) and jack pine (P. banksiana) complex as revealed by random amplified polymorphic DNA.
Ye TZ; Yang RC; Yeh FC
Genome; 2002 Jun; 45(3):530-40. PubMed ID: 12033622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Dimensionality of genomic information and its impact on genome-wide associations and variant selection for genomic prediction: a simulation study.
Jang S; Tsuruta S; Leite NG; Misztal I; Lourenco D
Genet Sel Evol; 2023 Jul; 55(1):49. PubMed ID: 37460964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Whole-genome sequence-based genomic prediction in laying chickens with different genomic relationship matrices to account for genetic architecture.
Ni G; Cavero D; Fangmann A; Erbe M; Simianer H
Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Jan; 49(1):8. PubMed ID: 28093063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. Dissimilarity based Partial Least Squares (DPLS) for genomic prediction from SNPs.
Singh P; Engel J; Jansen J; de Haan J; Buydens LM
BMC Genomics; 2016 May; 17():324. PubMed ID: 27142305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
68. Comparison of Models and Whole-Genome Profiling Approaches for Genomic-Enabled Prediction of Septoria Tritici Blotch, Stagonospora Nodorum Blotch, and Tan Spot Resistance in Wheat.
Juliana P; Singh RP; Singh PK; Crossa J; Rutkoski JE; Poland JA; Bergstrom GC; Sorrells ME
Plant Genome; 2017 Jul; 10(2):. PubMed ID: 28724084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Accuracy of Genomic Prediction in Synthetic Populations Depending on the Number of Parents, Relatedness, and Ancestral Linkage Disequilibrium.
Schopp P; Müller D; Technow F; Melchinger AE
Genetics; 2017 Jan; 205(1):441-454. PubMed ID: 28049710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. Genomic prediction in contrast to a genome-wide association study in explaining heritable variation of complex growth traits in breeding populations of Eucalyptus.
Müller BSF; Neves LG; de Almeida Filho JE; Resende MFR; Muñoz PR; Dos Santos PET; Filho EP; Kirst M; Grattapaglia D
BMC Genomics; 2017 Jul; 18(1):524. PubMed ID: 28693539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Prediction ability of genome-wide markers in Pinus taeda L. within and between population is affected by relatedness to the training population and trait genetic architecture.
Lauer E; Holland J; Isik F
G3 (Bethesda); 2022 Feb; 12(2):. PubMed ID: 34849838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Comparative analysis of the GBLUP, emBayesB, and GWAS algorithms to predict genetic values in large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea).
Dong L; Xiao S; Wang Q; Wang Z
BMC Genomics; 2016 Jun; 17():460. PubMed ID: 27301965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. Evaluation of genomic selection methods for predicting fiber quality traits in Upland cotton.
Islam MS; Fang DD; Jenkins JN; Guo J; McCarty JC; Jones DC
Mol Genet Genomics; 2020 Jan; 295(1):67-79. PubMed ID: 31473809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. Use of gene expression and whole-genome sequence information to improve the accuracy of genomic prediction for carcass traits in Hanwoo cattle.
de Las Heras-Saldana S; Lopez BI; Moghaddar N; Park W; Park JE; Chung KY; Lim D; Lee SH; Shin D; van der Werf JHJ
Genet Sel Evol; 2020 Sep; 52(1):54. PubMed ID: 32993481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. Integrating genomic information and productivity and climate-adaptability traits into a regional white spruce breeding program.
Cappa EP; Klutsch JG; Sebastian-Azcona J; Ratcliffe B; Wei X; Da Ros L; Liu Y; Chen C; Benowicz A; Sadoway S; Mansfield SD; Erbilgin N; Thomas BR; El-Kassaby YA
PLoS One; 2022; 17(3):e0264549. PubMed ID: 35298481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. In situ genetic association for serotiny, a fire-related trait, in Mediterranean maritime pine (Pinus pinaster).
Budde KB; Heuertz M; Hernández-Serrano A; Pausas JG; Vendramin GG; Verdú M; González-Martínez SC
New Phytol; 2014 Jan; 201(1):230-241. PubMed ID: 24015853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. 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]
78. To live fast or not: growth, vigor and longevity of old-growth ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine trees.
Kaufmann MR
Tree Physiol; 1996; 16(1_2):139-144. PubMed ID: 14871757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. Factors limiting the potential range expansion of lodgepole pine in Interior Alaska.
Walker XJ; Hart S; Hansen WD; Jean M; Brown CD; Stuart Chapin F; Hewitt R; Hollingsworth TN; Mack MC; Johnstone JF
Ecol Appl; 2024 Jul; 34(5):e2983. PubMed ID: 38840517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Cambial injury in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta): mountain pine beetle vs fire.
Arbellay E; Daniels LD; Mansfield SD; Chang AS
Tree Physiol; 2017 Dec; 37(12):1611-1621. PubMed ID: 29121262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
