190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36996212)
1. Analysis of genetic dominance in the UK Biobank.
Palmer DS; Zhou W; Abbott L; Wigdor EM; Baya N; Churchhouse C; Seed C; Poterba T; King D; Kanai M; Bloemendal A; Neale BM
Science; 2023 Mar; 379(6639):1341-1348. PubMed ID: 36996212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quantifying the contribution of dominance deviation effects to complex trait variation in biobank-scale data.
Pazokitoroudi A; Chiu AM; Burch KS; Pasaniuc B; Sankararaman S
Am J Hum Genet; 2021 May; 108(5):799-808. PubMed ID: 33811807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Estimation of non-additive genetic variance in human complex traits from a large sample of unrelated individuals.
Hivert V; Sidorenko J; Rohart F; Goddard ME; Yang J; Wray NR; Yengo L; Visscher PM
Am J Hum Genet; 2021 May; 108(5):786-798. PubMed ID: 33811805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Non-additive (dominance) effects of genetic variants associated with refractive error and myopia.
Pozarickij A; Williams C; Guggenheim JA;
Mol Genet Genomics; 2020 Jul; 295(4):843-853. PubMed ID: 32227305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The contribution of dominance to phenotype prediction in a pine breeding and simulated population.
de Almeida Filho JE; Guimarães JF; E Silva FF; de Resende MD; Muñoz P; Kirst M; Resende MF
Heredity (Edinb); 2016 Jul; 117(1):33-41. PubMed ID: 27118156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Incorporating functional priors improves polygenic prediction accuracy in UK Biobank and 23andMe data sets.
Márquez-Luna C; Gazal S; Loh PR; Kim SS; Furlotte N; Auton A; ; Price AL
Nat Commun; 2021 Oct; 12(1):6052. PubMed ID: 34663819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Apparent latent structure within the UK Biobank sample has implications for epidemiological analysis.
Haworth S; Mitchell R; Corbin L; Wade KH; Dudding T; Budu-Aggrey A; Carslake D; Hemani G; Paternoster L; Smith GD; Davies N; Lawson DJ; J Timpson N
Nat Commun; 2019 Jan; 10(1):333. PubMed ID: 30659178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. On the additive and dominant variance and covariance of individuals within the genomic selection scope.
Vitezica ZG; Varona L; Legarra A
Genetics; 2013 Dec; 195(4):1223-30. PubMed ID: 24121775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accounting for dominance to improve genomic evaluations of dairy cows for fertility and milk production traits.
Aliloo H; Pryce JE; González-Recio O; Cocks BG; Hayes BJ
Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Feb; 48():8. PubMed ID: 26830030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Phenome-wide heritability analysis of the UK Biobank.
Ge T; Chen CY; Neale BM; Sabuncu MR; Smoller JW
PLoS Genet; 2017 Apr; 13(4):e1006711. PubMed ID: 28388634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An atlas of genetic associations in UK Biobank.
Canela-Xandri O; Rawlik K; Tenesa A
Nat Genet; 2018 Nov; 50(11):1593-1599. PubMed ID: 30349118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Genomic Model with Correlation Between Additive and Dominance Effects.
Xiang T; Christensen OF; Vitezica ZG; Legarra A
Genetics; 2018 Jul; 209(3):711-723. PubMed ID: 29743175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biobank-scale inference of ancestral recombination graphs enables genealogical analysis of complex traits.
Zhang BC; Biddanda A; Gunnarsson ÁF; Cooper F; Palamara PF
Nat Genet; 2023 May; 55(5):768-776. PubMed ID: 37127670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Genome-wide prediction for complex traits under the presence of dominance effects in simulated populations using GBLUP and machine learning methods.
Alves AAC; da Costa RM; Bresolin T; Fernandes Júnior GA; Espigolan R; Ribeiro AMF; Carvalheiro R; de Albuquerque LG
J Anim Sci; 2020 Jun; 98(6):. PubMed ID: 32474602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Genomic analysis of dominance effects on milk production and conformation traits in Fleckvieh cattle.
Ertl J; Legarra A; Vitezica ZG; Varona L; Edel C; Emmerling R; Götz KU
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jun; 46(1):40. PubMed ID: 24962065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Fast estimation of genetic correlation for biobank-scale data.
Wu Y; Burch KS; Ganna A; Pajukanta P; Pasaniuc B; Sankararaman S
Am J Hum Genet; 2022 Jan; 109(1):24-32. PubMed ID: 34861179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Impact of fitting dominance and additive effects on accuracy of genomic prediction of breeding values in layers.
Heidaritabar M; Wolc A; Arango J; Zeng J; Settar P; Fulton JE; O'Sullivan NP; Bastiaansen JW; Fernando RL; Garrick DJ; Dekkers JC
J Anim Breed Genet; 2016 Oct; 133(5):334-46. PubMed ID: 27357473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Genome-Enabled Estimates of Additive and Nonadditive Genetic Variances and Prediction of Apple Phenotypes Across Environments.
Kumar S; Molloy C; Muñoz P; Daetwyler H; Chagné D; Volz R
G3 (Bethesda); 2015 Oct; 5(12):2711-8. PubMed ID: 26497141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Genomic prediction of growth in pigs based on a model including additive and dominance effects.
Lopes MS; Bastiaansen JW; Janss L; Knol EF; Bovenhuis H
J Anim Breed Genet; 2016 Jun; 133(3):180-6. PubMed ID: 26676611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of nonadditive effects in yearling weight of tropical beef cattle.
Raidan FSS; Porto-Neto LR; Li Y; Lehnert SA; Vitezica ZG; Reverter A
J Anim Sci; 2018 Sep; 96(10):4028-4034. PubMed ID: 30032181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
