Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26133806›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2015

Accuracy of estimated breeding values with genomic information on males, females, or both: an example on broiler chicken.

Daniela A L Lourenco, Breno O Fragomeni, Shogo Tsuruta, Ignacio Aguilar, Birgit Zumbach, Rachel J Hawken, Andres Legarra, Ignacy Misztal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniela A L LourencoDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA. danilino@uga.edu.
Breno O FragomeniDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA. fragomen@uga.edu.
Shogo TsurutaDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA. shogo@uga.edu.
Ignacio AguilarInstituto Nacional de Investigacion Agropecuaria, Las Brujas, 90200, Uruguay. iaguilar@inia.org.uy.
Birgit ZumbachCobb-Vantress Inc., Siloam Springs, AR, 72761, USA. Birgit.Zumbach@cobb-vantress.com.
Rachel J HawkenCobb-Vantress Inc., Siloam Springs, AR, 72761, USA. Rachel.Hawken@cobb-vantress.com.
Andres LegarraInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique, UMR1388 GenPhySE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France. Andres.Legarra@toulouse.inra.fr.
Ignacy MisztalDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA. ignacy@uga.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs more and more genotypes become available, accuracy of genomic evaluations can potentially increase. However, the impact of genotype data on accuracy depends on the structure of the genotyped cohort. For populations such as dairy cattle, the greatest benefit has come from genotyping sires with high accuracy, whereas the benefit due to adding genotypes from cows was smaller. In broiler chicken breeding programs, males have less progeny than dairy bulls, females have more progeny than dairy cows, and most production traits are recorded for both sexes. Consequently, genotyping both sexes in broiler chickens may be more advantageous than in dairy cattle.

methodsWe studied the contribution of genotypes from males and females using a real dataset with genotypes on 15 723 broiler chickens. Genomic evaluations used three training sets that included only males (4648), only females (8100), and both sexes (12 748). Realized accuracies of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were used to evaluate the benefit of including genotypes for different training populations on genomic predictions of young genotyped chickens.

resultsUsing genotypes on males, the average increase in accuracy of GEBV over pedigree-based EBV for males and females was 12 and 1 percentage points, respectively. Using female genotypes, this increase was 1 and 18 percentage points, respectively. Using genotypes of both sexes increased accuracies by 19 points for males and 20 points for females. For two traits with similar heritabilities and amounts of information, realized accuracies from cross-validation were lower for the trait that was under strong selection.

conclusionsOverall, genotyping males and females improves predictions of all young genotyped chickens, regardless of sex. Therefore, when males and females both contribute to genetic progress of the population, genotyping both sexes may be the best option.

Indexed as

GenotypeAnimalsBreedingChickensDatabases, GeneticFemaleMalePedigreeQuantitative Trait, Heritable

Identifiers

PMID26133806
PMCPMC4487961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.