Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29743175›Full record

ArticleGenetics2018

Genomic Model with Correlation Between Additive and Dominance Effects.

Tao Xiang, Ole Fredslund Christensen, Zulma Gladis Vitezica, Andres Legarra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Genomic analysis of breed composition and population structure in Montana composite cattle.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Atlantic salmon (Conservation physiology · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Genomic Prediction Methods Accounting for Nonadditive Genetic Effects.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Tao XiangKey Laboratory of Agricultural Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Ministry of Education and Key Laboratory of Swine Genetics and Breeding of Ministry of Agriculture, College of Animal Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, P. R. China Tao.Xiang@mail.hzau.edu.cn.
Ole Fredslund ChristensenCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark.
Zulma Gladis VitezicaUniversité de Toulouse, UMR 1388 GenPhySE, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France.
Andres LegarraINRA, UMR 1388 GenPhySE, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8893-7620

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dominance genetic effects are rarely included in pedigree-based genetic evaluation. With the availability of single nucleotide polymorphism markers and the development of genomic evaluation, estimates of dominance genetic effects have become feasible using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP). Usually, studies involving additive and dominance genetic effects ignore possible relationships between them. It has been often suggested that the magnitude of functional additive and dominance effects at the quantitative trait loci are related, but there is no existing GBLUP-like approach accounting for such correlation. Wellmann and Bennewitz (2012) showed two ways of considering directional relationships between additive and dominance effects, which they estimated in a Bayesian framework. However, these relationships cannot be fitted at the level of individuals instead of loci in a mixed model, and are not compatible with standard animal or plant breeding software. This comes from a fundamental ambiguity in assigning the reference allele at a given locus. We show that, if there has been selection, assigning the most frequent as the reference allele orients the correlation between functional additive and dominance effects. As a consequence, the most frequent reference allele is expected to have a positive value. We also demonstrate that selection creates negative covariance between genotypic additive and dominance genetic values. For parameter estimation, it is possible to use a combined additive and dominance relationship matrix computed from marker genotypes, and to use standard restricted maximum likelihood algorithms based on an equivalent model. Through a simulation study, we show that such correlations can easily be estimated by mixed model software and that the accuracy of prediction for genetic values is slightly improved if such correlations are used in GBLUP. However, a model assuming uncorrelated effects and fitting orthogonal breeding values and dominant deviations performed similarly for prediction.

Indexed as

Genes, DominantModels, GeneticAlgorithmsAnimalsBayes TheoremComputer SimulationGenomicsGenotypeHumansLinear ModelsPedigreePhenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideQuantitative Trait LociSelection, Geneticadditive genetic effectscorrelationdominance genetic effectsgenomic modelGenomic SelectionGenPredshared data resource

Identifiers

PMID29743175
PMCPMC6028252

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.