These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39174924)

  • 1. Marker effect p-values for single-step GWAS with the algorithm for proven and young in large genotyped populations.
    Leite NG; Bermann M; Tsuruta S; Misztal I; Lourenco D
    Genet Sel Evol; 2024 Aug; 56(1):59. PubMed ID: 39174924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparing algorithms to approximate accuracies for single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor.
    Ramos P; Garcia A; Retallik K; Bermann M; Tsuruta S; Misztal I; Veroneze R; Lourenco D
    J Anim Sci; 2024 Jan; 102():. PubMed ID: 39011991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Theoretical accuracy for indirect predictions based on SNP effects from single-step GBLUP.
    Garcia A; Aguilar I; Legarra A; Tsuruta S; Misztal I; Lourenco D
    Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Sep; 54(1):66. PubMed ID: 36162979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Is single-step genomic REML with the algorithm for proven and young more computationally efficient when less generations of data are present?
    Junqueira VS; Lourenco D; Masuda Y; Cardoso FF; Lopes PS; Silva FFE; Misztal I
    J Anim Sci; 2022 May; 100(5):. PubMed ID: 35289906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Indirect predictions with a large number of genotyped animals using the algorithm for proven and young.
    Garcia ALS; Masuda Y; Tsuruta S; Miller S; Misztal I; Lourenco D
    J Anim Sci; 2020 Jun; 98(6):. PubMed ID: 32374831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Efficient large-scale single-step evaluations and indirect genomic prediction of genotyped selection candidates.
    Vandenplas J; Ten Napel J; Darbaghshahi SN; Evans R; Calus MPL; Veerkamp R; Cromie A; Mäntysaari EA; Strandén I
    Genet Sel Evol; 2023 Jun; 55(1):37. PubMed ID: 37291510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Inexpensive Computation of the Inverse of the Genomic Relationship Matrix in Populations with Small Effective Population Size.
    Misztal I
    Genetics; 2016 Feb; 202(2):401-9. PubMed ID: 26584903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. On the equivalence between marker effect models and breeding value models and direct genomic values with the Algorithm for Proven and Young.
    Bermann M; Lourenco D; Forneris NS; Legarra A; Misztal I
    Genet Sel Evol; 2022 Jul; 54(1):52. PubMed ID: 35842585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Frequentist p-values for large-scale-single step genome-wide association, with an application to birth weight in American Angus cattle.
    Aguilar I; Legarra A; Cardoso F; Masuda Y; Lourenco D; Misztal I
    Genet Sel Evol; 2019 Jun; 51(1):28. PubMed ID: 31221101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Single-step SNP-BLUP with on-the-fly imputed genotypes and residual polygenic effects.
    Taskinen M; Mäntysaari EA; Strandén I
    Genet Sel Evol; 2017 Mar; 49(1):36. PubMed ID: 28359261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Current status of genomic evaluation.
    Misztal I; Lourenco D; Legarra A
    J Anim Sci; 2020 Apr; 98(4):. PubMed ID: 32267923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Short communication: Genomic prediction using different single-step methods in the Finnish red dairy cattle population.
    Gao H; Koivula M; Jensen J; Strandén I; Madsen P; Pitkänen T; Aamand GP; Mäntysaari EA
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Nov; 101(11):10082-10088. PubMed ID: 30146284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Solving efficiently large single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction models.
    Strandén I; Matilainen K; Aamand GP; Mäntysaari EA
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2017 Jun; 134(3):264-274. PubMed ID: 28508482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The quality of the algorithm for proven and young with various sets of core animals in a multibreed sheep population1.
    Nilforooshan MA; Lee M
    J Anim Sci; 2019 Mar; 97(3):1090-1100. PubMed ID: 30624671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A class of Bayesian methods to combine large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals for whole-genome analyses.
    Fernando RL; Dekkers JC; Garrick DJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Sep; 46(1):50. PubMed ID: 25253441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.