154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36637041)
1. Impact of genomic preselection on subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation of preselected animals for scarcely recorded feed intake in pigs.
Jibrila I; Ten Napel J; Vandenplas J; Bergsma R; Veerkamp RF; Calus MPL
J Anim Breed Genet; 2023 May; 140(3):253-263. PubMed ID: 36637041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of genomic preselection on subsequent genetic evaluations with ssGBLUP using real data from pigs.
Jibrila I; Vandenplas J; Ten Napel J; Bergsma R; Veerkamp RF; Calus MPL
Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Jun; 54(1):48. PubMed ID: 35764921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Investigating the impact of preselection on subsequent single-step genomic BLUP evaluation of preselected animals.
Jibrila I; Ten Napel J; Vandenplas J; Veerkamp RF; Calus MPL
Genet Sel Evol; 2020 Jul; 52(1):42. PubMed ID: 32727349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Avoiding preselection bias in subsequent single-step genomic BLUP evaluations of genomically preselected animals.
Jibrila I; Vandenplas J; Ten Napel J; Veerkamp RF; Calus MPL
J Anim Breed Genet; 2021 Jul; 138(4):432-441. PubMed ID: 33372707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Effect of predictor traits on accuracy of genomic breeding values for feed intake based on a limited cow reference population.
Pszczola M; Veerkamp RF; de Haas Y; Wall E; Strabel T; Calus MP
Animal; 2013 Nov; 7(11):1759-68. PubMed ID: 23915541
[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. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Single-step genomic evaluation with metafounders for feed conversion ratio and average daily gain in Danish Landrace and Yorkshire pigs.
Fu C; Ostersen T; Christensen OF; Xiang T
Genet Sel Evol; 2021 Oct; 53(1):79. PubMed ID: 34620083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Multi-line ssGBLUP evaluation using preselected markers from whole-genome sequence data in pigs.
Jang S; Ros-Freixedes R; Hickey JM; Chen CY; Herring WO; Holl J; Misztal I; Lourenco D
Front Genet; 2023; 14():1163626. PubMed ID: 37252662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reliability of breeding values for feed intake and feed efficiency traits in dairy cattle: When dry matter intake recordings are sparse under different scenarios.
Negussie E; Mehtiö T; Mäntysaari P; Løvendahl P; Mäntysaari EA; Lidauer MH
J Dairy Sci; 2019 Aug; 102(8):7248-7262. PubMed ID: 31155258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Impact of genotyping strategy on the accuracy of genomic prediction in simulated populations of purebred swine.
Li X; Zhang Z; Liu X; Chen Y
Animal; 2019 Sep; 13(9):1804-1810. PubMed ID: 30616709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
