Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30107792›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2018

Estimation of variance components and prediction of breeding values based on group records from varying group sizes.

Guosheng Su, Per Madsen, Bjarne Nielsen, Tage Ostersen, Mahmoud Shirali, Just Jensen, Ole F Christensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Guosheng SuCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, 8830, Tjele, Denmark. guosheng.su@mbg.au.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8743-7501
Per MadsenCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, 8830, Tjele, Denmark.
Bjarne NielsenSEGES, Pig Research Centre, 1609, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tage OstersenSEGES, Pig Research Centre, 1609, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mahmoud ShiraliCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, 8830, Tjele, Denmark.
Just JensenCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, 8830, Tjele, Denmark.
Ole F ChristensenCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, 8830, Tjele, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecords on groups of individuals rather than on single individuals could be valuable for predicting breeding values (BV) of the traits that are difficult or costly to measure individually, such as feed intake in pigs or beef cattle. Here, we present a model, which handles group records from varying group sizes and involves multiple fixed and random effects, for estimating variance components and predicting BV. Moreover, using simulation, we investigated the efficiency of group records for predicting BV in situations with various group sizes and structures, and factors that affect the trait.

resultsThe results show that the presented model for group records worked well and that variances estimated from group records with varying group sizes were consistent with those estimated from individual records, but with larger standard errors. Ignoring litter and pen effects had very little or no influence on the accuracy of estimated BV (EBV) obtained from group records. However, ignoring litter effects resulted in biased estimates of additive genetic variance and EBV. The presence of litter and pen effects on phenotypes decreased the accuracy of EBV although the prediction model fitted both effects. Having more littermates in the same pen led to a higher accuracy of EBV. The decay of EBV accuracy with increasing group size was more marked for scenarios with litter and pen effects than without. When litters of six individuals were divided into two pens, accuracies of EBV obtained from group records with a size up to 12 (average 9.6) and up to 24 (average 19.2) were 66.6 and 57.6% of those estimated from individual records in the scenario with litter and pen effects on phenotypes. These percentages reached 77.0 and 68.4% in the scenario without litter and pen effects on phenotypes.

conclusionsOur results indicate that the model works appropriately for the analysis of group records from varying group sizes. Using group records for genetic evaluation of traits such as feed intake in pig is feasible and the efficiency of the resulting estimates depends on the size and structure of the groups and on the magnitude of the variances for litter and pen effects.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationModels, GeneticRecordsAnimal HusbandryAnimalsBreedingQuantitative Trait, HeritableSample SizeSwine

Identifiers

PMID30107792
PMCPMC6092838

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.