ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2014
Right-hand-side updating for fast computing of genomic breeding values.
Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- BayesR3 enables fast MCMC blocked processing for largescale multi-trait genomic prediction and QTN mapping analysis.Communications biology · 2022Article
- On the use of whole-genome sequence data for across-breed genomic prediction and fine-scale mapping of QTL.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021Article
- Harnessing genomic information for livestock improvement.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2019Review
- A hybrid expectation maximisation and MCMC sampling algorithm to implement Bayesian mixture model based genomic prediction and QTL mapping.BMC genomics · 2016Article
- Efficient genomic prediction based on whole-genome sequence data using split-and-merge Bayesian variable selection.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2016Article
- Across population genomic prediction scenarios in which Bayesian variable selection outperforms GBLUP.BMC genetics · 2015Article
- Genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2015Article
- Genomic prediction based on data from three layer lines: a comparison between linear methods.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2014Article
- Genomic prediction of breeding values using previously estimated SNP variances.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2014Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince both the number of SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) used in genomic prediction and the number of individuals used in training datasets are rapidly increasing, there is an increasing need to improve the efficiency of genomic prediction models in terms of computing time and memory (RAM) required.
methodsIn this paper, two alternative algorithms for genomic prediction are presented that replace the originally suggested residual updating algorithm, without affecting the estimates. The first alternative algorithm continues to use residual updating, but takes advantage of the characteristic that the predictor variables in the model (i.e. the SNP genotypes) take only three different values, and is therefore termed "improved residual updating". The second alternative algorithm, here termed "right-hand-side updating" (RHS-updating), extends the idea of improved residual updating across multiple SNPs. The alternative algorithms can be implemented for a range of different genomic predictions models, including random regression BLUP (best linear unbiased prediction) and most Bayesian genomic prediction models. To test the required computing time and RAM, both alternative algorithms were implemented in a Bayesian stochastic search variable selection model.
resultsCompared to the original algorithm, the improved residual updating algorithm reduced CPU time by 35.3 to 43.3%, without changing memory requirements. The RHS-updating algorithm reduced CPU time by 74.5 to 93.0% and memory requirements by 13.1 to 66.4% compared to the original algorithm.
conclusionsThe presented RHS-updating algorithm provides an interesting alternative to reduce both computing time and memory requirements for a range of genomic prediction models.
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.