ArticleBiometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift2018
An approximate Bayesian significance test for genomic evaluations.
Article in Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An approximate Bayesian significance test for genomic evaluations.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic information can be used to study the genetic architecture of some trait. Not only the size of the genetic effect captured by molecular markers and their position on the genome but also the mode of inheritance, which might be additive or dominant, and the presence of interactions are interesting parameters. When searching for interacting loci, estimating the effect size and determining the significant marker pairs increases the computational burden in terms of speed and memory allocation dramatically. This study revisits a rapid Bayesian approach (fastbayes). As a novel contribution, a measure of evidence is derived to select markers with effect significantly different from zero. It is based on the credibility of the highest posterior density interval next to zero in a marginalized manner. This methodology is applied to simulated data resembling a dairy cattle population in order to verify the sensitivity of testing for a given range of type-I error levels. A real data application complements this study. Sensitivity and specificity of fastbayes were similar to a variational Bayesian method, and a further reduction of computing time could be achieved. More than 50% of the simulated causative variants were identified. The most complex model containing different kinds of genetic effects and their pairwise interactions yielded the best outcome over a range of type-I error levels. The validation study showed that fastbayes is a dual-purpose tool for genomic inferences - it is applicable to predict future outcome of not-yet phenotyped individuals with high precision as well as to estimate and test single-marker effects. Furthermore, it allows the estimation of billions of interaction effects.
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.