ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2015
Genomic Prediction Accounting for Residual Heteroskedasticity.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Better Multi-Breed Genomic Predictions for Tropical Bull Fertility Using a Breed-Adjusted Genomic Relationship Matrix.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026Article
- Beef cattle phenotypic plasticity and stability of dry matter intake and respiration rate across varying levels of temperature humidity index.Journal of animal science · 2025Article
- Efficient Estimation of Marker Effects in Plant Breeding.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Article
- Extensions of BLUP Models for Genomic Prediction in Heterogeneous Populations: Application in a Diverse Switchgrass Sample.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Article
- Models Integrating Genetic and Lifestyle Interactions on Two Adiposity Phenotypes for Personalized Prescription of Energy-Restricted Diets With Different Macronutrient Distribution.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whole-genome prediction (WGP) models that use single-nucleotide polymorphism marker information to predict genetic merit of animals and plants typically assume homogeneous residual variance. However, variability is often heterogeneous across agricultural production systems and may subsequently bias WGP-based inferences. This study extends classical WGP models based on normality, heavy-tailed specifications and variable selection to explicitly account for environmentally-driven residual heteroskedasticity under a hierarchical Bayesian mixed-models framework. WGP models assuming homogeneous or heterogeneous residual variances were fitted to training data generated under simulation scenarios reflecting a gradient of increasing heteroskedasticity. Model fit was based on pseudo-Bayes factors and also on prediction accuracy of genomic breeding values computed on a validation data subset one generation removed from the simulated training dataset. Homogeneous vs. heterogeneous residual variance WGP models were also fitted to two quantitative traits, namely 45-min postmortem carcass temperature and loin muscle pH, recorded in a swine resource population dataset prescreened for high and mild residual heteroskedasticity, respectively. Fit of competing WGP models was compared using pseudo-Bayes factors. Predictive ability, defined as the correlation between predicted and observed phenotypes in validation sets of a five-fold cross-validation was also computed. Heteroskedastic error WGP models showed improved model fit and enhanced prediction accuracy compared to homoskedastic error WGP models although the magnitude of the improvement was small (less than two percentage points net gain in prediction accuracy). Nevertheless, accounting for residual heteroskedasticity did improve accuracy of selection, especially on individuals of extreme genetic merit.
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.