Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29385460›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2018

Weighting genomic and genealogical information for genetic parameter estimation and breeding value prediction in tropical beef cattle.

Fernanda S S Raidan, Laercio R Porto-Neto, Yutao Li, Sigrid A Lehnert, Antonio Reverter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Fernanda S S RaidanCSIRO Agriculture & Food, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Laercio R Porto-NetoCSIRO Agriculture & Food, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Yutao LiCSIRO Agriculture & Food, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Sigrid A LehnertCSIRO Agriculture & Food, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Antonio ReverterCSIRO Agriculture & Food, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A combined matrix that exploits genealogy together with marker-based information could improve the selection of elite individuals in breeding programs. We present genetic parameters for adaptive and growth traits in beef cattle by exploring linear combinations of pedigree-based (A) and marker-based (G) relationship matrices. We use a data set with 2,111 Brahman (BB) and 2,550 Tropical Composite (TC) cattle with genotypes for 729,068 SNP, and phenotypes for five traits. A weighted relationship matrix (WRM) combining G and A was constructed as WRM = λG + (1 - λ)A. The weight (λ) was explored at values from 0.0 to 1.0, at 0.1 intervals. Additionally, four alternative G matrices, in the WRM, were evaluated according to the selection of SNP used to generate them: 1) Gw: all autosomal SNP with minor allele frequency (MAF) > 1%; 2) Gg: autosomal SNP with MAF > 1% and mapped inside to gene coding regions; 3) Gp: autosomal SNP with MAF > 1% and previously reported to have significant pleiotropic effect in these two populations; and 4) Gc: autosomal SNP with MAF > 1% and with significant correlated effects previously reported in both BB and TC populations. In addition, two A matrices were evaluated: 1) A: all relationships between animals were considered after tracing back known ancestors; and 2) Ad: a distorted A matrix where a random 1% of the off-diagonal nonzero values were set to zero to simulate relationship errors. Five independent Ad matrices were explored each with a different random 1% of relationships masked. Criteria for comparing the resulting WRM included estimates of heritability (h2) and cross-validation accuracy (ACC) of genomic estimated breeding values. The choice of WRM had a greater impact on h2 than on ACC estimates. The 1% errors introduced in pedigree relationships generated large distortion in genetic parameters and ACC estimates. However, employing a λ > 0.7 was an efficient mechanism to compensate for the errors in A. Additionally, although significant (P-value < 0.0001), we found no consistent relationship between the type of SNP used to compute G and h2 or ACC estimates. We devised the optimal value of λ for maximum h2 and ACC at λ = 0.7 suggesting a 70% and 30% weighting to genomic and genealogical information, respectively, as an optimal strategy to compensate for pedigree errors, to improve genetic parameters estimates and lead to more accurate selection decisions.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticPolymorphism, Single NucleotideAnimalsBreedingCattleGene FrequencyGenomeGenomicsGenotypePedigreeSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID29385460
PMCPMC6140871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.