ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2012
Inclusion of cow records in genomic evaluations and impact on bias due to preferential treatment.
Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating Adjusted ssGBLUP Models for Genomic Prediction and Matrix Compatibility in South African Holstein Cattle.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) effectively models small cattle populations: lessons from the Israeli-Holstein Herdbook.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Using a very low-density SNP panel for genomic selection in a breeding program for sheep.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2017Article
- Systematic genotyping of groups of cows to improve genomic estimated breeding values of selection candidates.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2016Article
- Improved precision of QTL mapping using a nonlinear Bayesian method in a multi-breed population leads to greater accuracy of across-breed genomic predictions.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2015Article
- Invited review: overview of new traits and phenotyping strategies in dairy cattle with a focus on functional traits.Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience · 2015Review
- Impact of genotype imputation on the performance of GBLUP and Bayesian methods for genomic prediction.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundToday, genomic evaluations are an essential feature of dairy cattle breeding. Initially, genomic evaluation targeted young bulls but recently, a rapidly increasing number of females (both heifers and cows) are being genotyped. A rising issue is whether and how own performance of genotyped cows should be included in genomic evaluations. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of including yield deviations, i.e. own performance of cows, in genomic evaluations.
methodsTwo different genomic evaluations were performed: one including only reliable daughter yield deviations of proven bulls based on their non-genotyped daughters, and one including both daughter yield deviations for males and own yield deviations for genotyped females. Milk yield, the trait most prone to preferential treatment, and somatic cell count, for which such a bias is very unlikely, were studied. Data consisted of two groups of animals from the three main dairy breeds in France: 11 884 elite females genotyped by breeding companies and 7032 cows genotyped for a research project (and considered as randomly selected from the commercial population).
resultsFor several measures that could be related to preferential treatment bias, the elite group presented a different pattern of estimated breeding values for milk yield compared to the other combinations of trait and group: for instance, for milk yield, the average difference between estimated breeding values with or without own yield deviations was significantly different from 0 for this group. Correlations between estimated breeding values with or without yield deviations were lower for elite females than for randomly selected cows for milk yield but were very similar for somatic cell count.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that including own milk performance of elite females leads to biased (over-estimated) genomic evaluations. Thus, milk production records of elite cows require specific treatment in genomic evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.