ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2013
Enlarging a training set for genomic selection by imputation of un-genotyped animals in populations of varying genetic architecture.
Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inclusion of imputed genotypes from non-genotyped dairy cattle in a Thai multibreed genomic-polygenic evaluation.Animal bioscience · 2025Article
- Imputation of non-genotyped F1 dams to improve genetic gain in swine crossbreeding programs.Journal of animal science · 2022Article
- Identification of genomic regions affecting production traits in pigs divergently selected for feed efficiency.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021Article
- Genotype Imputation to Improve the Cost-Efficiency of Genomic Selection in Rabbits.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- High imputation accuracy from informative low-to-medium density single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes is achievable in sheep1.Journal of animal science · 2019Article
- Comparing strategies for selection of low-density SNPs for imputation-mediated genomic prediction in U. S. Holsteins.Genetica · 2018Article
- Imputation Accuracy from Low to Moderate Density Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Chips in a Thai Multibreed Dairy Cattle Population.Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences · 2016Article
- Impact of imputation methods on the amount of genetic variation captured by a single-nucleotide polymorphism panel in soybeans.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- Accuracy of imputation using the most common sires as reference population in layer chickens.BMC genetics · 2015Article
- Accuracy of genome-wide imputation in Braford and Hereford beef cattle.BMC genetics · 2014Article
- Imputation of non-genotyped individuals based on genotyped relatives: assessing the imputation accuracy of a real case scenario in dairy cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe most common application of imputation is to infer genotypes of a high-density panel of markers on animals that are genotyped for a low-density panel. However, the increase in accuracy of genomic predictions resulting from an increase in the number of markers tends to reach a plateau beyond a certain density. Another application of imputation is to increase the size of the training set with un-genotyped animals. This strategy can be particularly successful when a set of closely related individuals are genotyped.
methodsImputation on completely un-genotyped dams was performed using known genotypes from the sire of each dam, one offspring and the offspring's sire. Two methods were applied based on either allele or haplotype frequencies to infer genotypes at ambiguous loci. Results of these methods and of two available software packages were compared. Quality of imputation under different population structures was assessed. The impact of using imputed dams to enlarge training sets on the accuracy of genomic predictions was evaluated for different populations, heritabilities and sizes of training sets.
resultsImputation accuracy ranged from 0.52 to 0.93 depending on the population structure and the method used. The method that used allele frequencies performed better than the method based on haplotype frequencies. Accuracy of imputation was higher for populations with higher levels of linkage disequilibrium and with larger proportions of markers with more extreme allele frequencies. Inclusion of imputed dams in the training set increased the accuracy of genomic predictions. Gains in accuracy ranged from close to zero to 37.14%, depending on the simulated scenario. Generally, the larger the accuracy already obtained with the genotyped training set, the lower the increase in accuracy achieved by adding imputed dams.
conclusionsWhenever a reference population resembling the family configuration considered here is available, imputation can be used to achieve an extra increase in accuracy of genomic predictions by enlarging the training set with completely un-genotyped dams. This strategy was shown to be particularly useful for populations with lower levels of linkage disequilibrium, for genomic selection on traits with low heritability, and for species or breeds for which the size of the reference population is limited.
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.