201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38066581)
1. Imputation strategies for genomic prediction using nanopore sequencing.
Lamb HJ; Nguyen LT; Copley JP; Engle BN; Hayes BJ; Ross EM
BMC Biol; 2023 Dec; 21(1):286. PubMed ID: 38066581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Genomic prediction using low-coverage portable Nanopore sequencing.
Lamb HJ; Hayes BJ; Randhawa IAS; Nguyen LT; Ross EM
PLoS One; 2021; 16(12):e0261274. PubMed ID: 34910782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Genotype imputation from various low-density SNP panels and its impact on accuracy of genomic breeding values in pigs.
Grossi DA; Brito LF; Jafarikia M; Schenkel FS; Feng Z
Animal; 2018 Nov; 12(11):2235-2245. PubMed ID: 29706144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Design of a low-density SNP chip for the main Australian sheep breeds and its effect on imputation and genomic prediction accuracy.
Bolormaa S; Gore K; van der Werf JH; Hayes BJ; Daetwyler HD
Anim Genet; 2015 Oct; 46(5):544-56. PubMed ID: 26360638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing technologies as an alternative to low-density SNP chips for genomic selection: a simulation study in layer chickens.
Herry F; Hérault F; Lecerf F; Lagoutte L; Doublet M; Picard-Druet D; Bardou P; Varenne A; Burlot T; Le Roy P; Allais S
BMC Genomics; 2023 May; 24(1):271. PubMed ID: 37208589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Genomic predictions for economically important traits in Brazilian Braford and Hereford beef cattle using true and imputed genotypes.
Piccoli ML; Brito LF; Braccini J; Cardoso FF; Sargolzaei M; Schenkel FS
BMC Genet; 2017 Jan; 18(1):2. PubMed ID: 28100165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The feasibility of using low-density marker panels for genotype imputation and genomic prediction of crossbred dairy cattle of East Africa.
Aliloo H; Mrode R; Okeyo AM; Ni G; Goddard ME; Gibson JP
J Dairy Sci; 2018 Oct; 101(10):9108-9127. PubMed ID: 30077450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accuracy of imputation to whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle.
van Binsbergen R; Bink MC; Calus MP; van Eeuwijk FA; Hayes BJ; Hulsegge I; Veerkamp RF
Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jul; 46(1):41. PubMed ID: 25022768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Interest of using imputation for genomic evaluation in layer chicken.
Herry F; Druet DP; Hérault F; Varenne A; Burlot T; Le Roy P; Allais S
Poult Sci; 2020 May; 99(5):2324-2336. PubMed ID: 32359567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Accuracy of genotype imputation in sheep breeds.
Hayes BJ; Bowman PJ; Daetwyler HD; Kijas JW; van der Werf JH
Anim Genet; 2012 Feb; 43(1):72-80. PubMed ID: 22221027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle.
van Binsbergen R; Calus MP; Bink MC; van Eeuwijk FA; Schrooten C; Veerkamp RF
Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Sep; 47(1):71. PubMed ID: 26381777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Genotype Imputation to Improve the Cost-Efficiency of Genomic Selection in Rabbits.
Mancin E; Sosa-Madrid BS; Blasco A; Ibáñez-Escriche N
Animals (Basel); 2021 Mar; 11(3):. PubMed ID: 33805619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Imputation of genotypes with low-density chips and its effect on reliability of direct genomic values in Dutch Holstein cattle.
Mulder HA; Calus MP; Druet T; Schrooten C
J Dairy Sci; 2012 Feb; 95(2):876-89. PubMed ID: 22281352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Practical implementation of cost-effective genomic selection in commercial pig breeding using imputation.
Cleveland MA; Hickey JM
J Anim Sci; 2013 Aug; 91(8):3583-92. PubMed ID: 23736050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of estimation of genomic breeding values in pigs using low-density genotypes and imputation.
Badke YM; Bates RO; Ernst CW; Fix J; Steibel JP
G3 (Bethesda); 2014 Apr; 4(4):623-31. PubMed ID: 24531728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of developed low-density genotype panels for imputation to higher density in independent dairy and beef cattle populations.
Judge MM; Kearney JF; McClure MC; Sleator RD; Berry DP
J Anim Sci; 2016 Mar; 94(3):949-62. PubMed ID: 27065257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Genotype imputation for the prediction of genomic breeding values in non-genotyped and low-density genotyped individuals.
Cleveland MA; Hickey JM; Kinghorn BP
BMC Proc; 2011 May; 5 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S6. PubMed ID: 21624176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
