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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8559719)

  • 1. Comparison of index selection and best linear unbiased prediction for simulated layer poultry data.
    Jeyaruban MG; Gibson JP; Gowe RS
    Poult Sci; 1995 Oct; 74(10):1566-76. PubMed ID: 8559719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Selection on individual phenotype and best linear unbiased predictor of breeding value in a closed swine herd.
    Belonsky GM; Kennedy BW
    J Anim Sci; 1988 May; 66(5):1124-31. PubMed ID: 3397339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Optimised parent selection and minimum inbreeding mating in small aquaculture breeding schemes: a simulation study.
    Hely FS; Amer PR; Walker SP; Symonds JE
    Animal; 2013 Jan; 7(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 23031385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Optimum contribution selection using traditional best linear unbiased prediction and genomic breeding values in aquaculture breeding schemes.
    Nielsen HM; Sonesson AK; Meuwissen TH
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Mar; 89(3):630-8. PubMed ID: 21036937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of culling on selection response using phenotypic selection or best linear unbiased prediction of breeding values in small, closed herds of swine.
    Kuhlers DL; Kennedy BW
    J Anim Sci; 1992 Aug; 70(8):2338-48. PubMed ID: 1506297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Allele frequency changes due to hitch-hiking in genomic selection programs.
    Liu H; Sørensen AC; Meuwissen TH; Berg P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Feb; 46(1):8. PubMed ID: 24495634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Efficient selection against categorically scored hip dysplasia in dogs is possible using best linear unbiased prediction and optimum contribution selection: a simulation study.
    Malm S; Sørensen AC; Fikse WF; Strandberg E
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2013 Apr; 130(2):154-64. PubMed ID: 23496016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Indirect genetic effects and inbreeding: consequences of BLUP selection for socially affected traits on rate of inbreeding.
    Khaw HL; Ponzoni RW; Bijma P
    Genet Sel Evol; 2014 Jun; 46(1):39. PubMed ID: 24961990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using recent versus complete pedigree data in genetic evaluation of a closed nucleus broiler line.
    Mehrabani-Yeganeh H; Gibson JP; Schaeffer LR
    Poult Sci; 1999 Jul; 78(7):937-41. PubMed ID: 10404672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effect of using different culling regimens on genetic response with two-trait, two-stage selection in a nucleus broiler stock.
    Mehrabani-Yeganeh H; Gibson JP; Uimari P
    Poult Sci; 1999 Jul; 78(7):931-6. PubMed ID: 10404671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Impacts of genotyping strategies on long-term genetic response in genomic selection.
    Nishio M; Satoh M
    Anim Sci J; 2014 May; 85(5):511-6. PubMed ID: 24506177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of genomic and traditional BLUP-estimated breeding value accuracy and selection response under alternative trait and genomic parameters.
    Muir WM
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Dec; 124(6):342-55. PubMed ID: 18076471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Animal model and multiple trait BLUP applied in poultry genetic evaluation].
    Pang H; Wu CX; Zhang Y; Gong GF; Bi YH
    Yi Chuan Xue Bao; 1989; 16(4):291-8. PubMed ID: 2486251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mating structures for genomic selection breeding programs in aquaculture.
    Sonesson AK; Ødegård J
    Genet Sel Evol; 2016 Jun; 48(1):46. PubMed ID: 27342705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of selection based on phenotype, selection index and best linear unbiased prediction using data from a closed broiler line.
    Morris AJ; Pollott GE
    Br Poult Sci; 1997 Jul; 38(3):249-54. PubMed ID: 9280349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Marker assisted selection for the improvement of two antagonistic traits under mixed inheritance.
    Verrier E
    Genet Sel Evol; 2001; 33(1):17-38. PubMed ID: 11268312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information.
    Schenkel FS; Schaeffer LR; Boettcher PJ
    Genet Sel Evol; 2002; 34(1):41-59. PubMed ID: 11929624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Genetic evaluation with uncertain parentage: a comparison of methods.
    Perez-Enciso M; Fernando RL
    Theor Appl Genet; 1992 Jun; 84(1-2):173-9. PubMed ID: 24203044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Genetic selection strategies: computer modeling.
    Muir WM
    Poult Sci; 1997 Aug; 76(8):1066-70. PubMed ID: 9251130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reliability of pedigree-based and genomic evaluations in selected populations.
    Gorjanc G; Bijma P; Hickey JM
    Genet Sel Evol; 2015 Aug; 47(1):65. PubMed ID: 26271246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.