130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36421775)
21. Genotype Imputation To Improve the Cost-Efficiency of Genomic Selection in Farmed Atlantic Salmon.
Tsai HY; Matika O; Edwards SM; Antolín-Sánchez R; Hamilton A; Guy DR; Tinch AE; Gharbi K; Stear MJ; Taggart JB; Bron JE; Hickey JM; Houston RD
G3 (Bethesda); 2017 Apr; 7(4):1377-1383. PubMed ID: 28250015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Genomic prediction with whole-genome sequence data in intensely selected pig lines.
Ros-Freixedes R; Johnsson M; Whalen A; Chen CY; Valente BD; Herring WO; Gorjanc G; Hickey JM
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Sep; 54(1):65. PubMed ID: 36153511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. A single-step genomic model with direct estimation of marker effects.
Liu Z; Goddard ME; Reinhardt F; Reents R
J Dairy Sci; 2014 Sep; 97(9):5833-50. PubMed ID: 25022678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Genomic predictions in purebreds with a multibreed genomic relationship matrix1.
Steyn Y; Lourenco DAL; Misztal I
J Anim Sci; 2019 Nov; 97(11):4418-4427. PubMed ID: 31539424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Strategies and utility of imputed SNP genotypes for genomic analysis in dairy cattle.
Khatkar MS; Moser G; Hayes BJ; Raadsma HW
BMC Genomics; 2012 Oct; 13():538. PubMed ID: 23043356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Genomic relationships based on X chromosome markers and accuracy of genomic predictions with and without X chromosome markers.
Su G; Guldbrandtsen B; Aamand GP; Strandén I; Lund MS
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jul; 46(1):47. PubMed ID: 25080199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Potential of genotyping-by-sequencing for genomic selection in livestock populations.
Gorjanc G; Cleveland MA; Houston RD; Hickey JM
Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Mar; 47(1):12. PubMed ID: 25887531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Genomic preselection with genotyping-by-sequencing increases performance of commercial oil palm hybrid crosses.
Cros D; Bocs S; Riou V; Ortega-Abboud E; Tisné S; Argout X; Pomiès V; Nodichao L; Lubis Z; Cochard B; Durand-Gasselin T
BMC Genomics; 2017 Nov; 18(1):839. PubMed ID: 29096603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Genomic Prediction Based on SNP Functional Annotation Using Imputed Whole-Genome Sequence Data in Korean Hanwoo Cattle.
Lopez BIM; An N; Srikanth K; Lee S; Oh JD; Shin DH; Park W; Chai HH; Park JE; Lim D
Front Genet; 2020; 11():603822. PubMed ID: 33552124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Genomic predictions improve clonal selection in oil palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) hybrids.
Nyouma A; Bell JM; Jacob F; Riou V; Manez A; Pomiès V; Nodichao L; Syahputra I; Affandi D; Cochard B; Durand-Gasselin T; Cros D
Plant Sci; 2020 Oct; 299():110547. PubMed ID: 32900451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. High density marker panels, SNPs prioritizing and accuracy of genomic selection.
Chang LY; Toghiani S; Ling A; Aggrey SE; Rekaya R
BMC Genet; 2018 Jan; 19(1):4. PubMed ID: 29304753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. Short communication: Improving the accuracy of genomic prediction of body conformation traits in Chinese Holsteins using markers derived from high-density marker panels.
Song H; Li L; Ma P; Zhang S; Su G; Lund MS; Zhang Q; Ding X
J Dairy Sci; 2018 Jun; 101(6):5250-5254. PubMed ID: 29550139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. Accuracy of genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in white layers.
Heidaritabar M; Calus MP; Megens HJ; Vereijken A; Groenen MA; Bastiaansen JW
J Anim Breed Genet; 2016 Jun; 133(3):167-79. PubMed ID: 26776363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Impact of linkage disequilibrium heterogeneity along the genome on genomic prediction and heritability estimation.
Ren D; Cai X; Lin Q; Ye H; Teng J; Li J; Ding X; Zhang Z
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Jun; 54(1):47. PubMed ID: 35761182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Performance evaluation of artificial intelligence paradigms-artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system for flood prediction.
Tabbussum R; Dar AQ
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2021 May; 28(20):25265-25282. PubMed ID: 33453033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Efficient genomic prediction based on whole-genome sequence data using split-and-merge Bayesian variable selection.
Calus MP; Bouwman AC; Schrooten C; Veerkamp RF
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Jun; 48(1):49. PubMed ID: 27357580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Multi-generational imputation of single nucleotide polymorphism marker genotypes and accuracy of genomic selection.
Toghiani S; Aggrey SE; Rekaya R
Animal; 2016 Jul; 10(7):1077-85. PubMed ID: 27076192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
