Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28651561›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2017

The effect of mislabeled phenotypic status on the identification of mutation-carriers from SNP genotypes in dairy cattle.

Stefano Biffani, Hubert Pausch, Hermann Schwarzenbacher, Filippo Biscarini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Using visual scores for genomic prediction of complex traits in breeding programs.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Stefano BiffaniIBBA-CNR, Via Einstein-Loc. Cascina Codazza, 26900, Lodi, Italy.
Hubert PauschTechnische Universität München, Liesel-Beckmann Straße 1, 85354, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany.
Hermann SchwarzenbacherZuchtData EDV Dienstleistungen GmbH, Dresdner Straße 89/19, 1200, Wien, Austria.
Filippo BiscariniIBBA-CNR, Via Einstein-Loc. Cascina Codazza, 26900, Lodi, Italy. filippo.biscarini@ptp.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3901-2354

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStatistical and machine learning applications are increasingly popular in animal breeding and genetics, especially to compute genomic predictions for phenotypes of interest. Noise (errors) in the data may have a negative impact on the accuracy of predictions. The effects of noisy data have been investigated in genome-wide association studies for case-control experiments, and in genomic predictions for binary traits in plants. No studies have been published yet on the impact of noisy data in animal genomics. In this work, the susceptibility to noise of five classification models (Lasso-penalised logistic regression-Lasso, K-nearest neighbours-KNN, random forest-RF, support vector machines with linear-SVML-or radial-SVMR-kernel) was tested. As illustration, the identification of carriers of a recessive mutation in cattle (Bos taurus) was used. A population of 3116 Fleckvieh animals with SNP genotypes on the same chromosome as the mutation locus (BTA 19) was available. The carrier status (0/1 phenotype) was randomly sampled to generate noise. Increasing proportions of noise-up to 20%- were introduced in the data.

resultsSVMR and Lasso were relatively more robust to noise in the data, with total accuracy still above 0.975 and TPR (true positive rate; accuracy in the minority class) in the range 0.5-0.80 also with 17.5-20% mislabeled observations. The performance of SVML and RF decreased monotonically with increasing noise in the data, while KNN constantly failed to identify mutation carriers (observations in the minority class). The computation time increased with noise in the data, especially for the two support vector machines classifiers.

conclusionsThis work was the first to assess the impact of phenotyping errors on the accuracy of genomic predictions in animal genetics. The choice of the classification method can influence results in terms of higher or lower susceptibility to noise. In the presented problem, SVM with radial kernel performed relatively well even when the proportion of errors in the data reached 12.5%. Lasso was the second best method, while SVML, RF and KNN were very sensitive to noise. Taking into account both accuracy and computation time, Lasso provided the best combination.

Indexed as

DairyingAnimalsCattleGenotypeHeterozygoteMutationPhenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotidePublicationsTime FactorsAnimal genomicsBos taurusClassificationGenomic predictionsNoisy dataPhenotyping errorsSNP genotypes

Identifiers

PMID28651561
PMCPMC5485573

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.