ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2018
Quantifying genomic connectedness and prediction accuracy from additive and non-additive gene actions.
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 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic connectedness and genotype-by-environment interaction in a maternal pig line across countries.Journal of animal science · 2026Article
- Impact of different genomic relationship matrix construction methods on the accuracy of genomic prediction in different species.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Principal component analysis revisited: fast multitrait genetic evaluations with smooth convergence.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024Article
- Improving the accuracy of genomic prediction in dairy cattle using the biologically annotated neural networks framework.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Portability of genomic predictions trained on sparse factorial designs across two maize silage breeding cycles.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2024Article
- PyAGH: a python package to fast construct kinship matrices based on different levels of omic data.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Building a Calibration Set for Genomic Prediction, Characteristics to Be Considered, and Optimization Approaches.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Development of whole-genome prediction models to increase the rate of genetic gain in intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium) breeding.The plant genome · 2021Article
- GCA: an R package for genetic connectedness analysis using pedigree and genomic data.BMC genomics · 2021Article
- Genomic Selection in Sugarcane: Current Status and Future Prospects.Frontiers in plant science · 2021Review
- Training Set Optimization for Sparse Phenotyping in Genomic Selection: A Conceptual Overview.Frontiers in plant science · 2021Article
- An assessment of genomic connectedness measures in Nellore cattle.Journal of animal science · 2020Article
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
backgroundGenetic connectedness is classically used as an indication of the risk associated with breeding value comparisons across management units because genetic evaluations based on best linear unbiased prediction rely for their success on sufficient linkage among different units. In the whole-genome prediction era, the concept of genetic connectedness can be extended to measure a connectedness level between reference and validation sets. However, little is known regarding (1) the impact of non-additive gene action on genomic connectedness measures and (2) the relationship between the estimated level of connectedness and prediction accuracy in the presence of non-additive genetic variation.
resultsWe evaluated the extent to which non-additive kernel relationship matrices increase measures of connectedness and investigated its relationship with prediction accuracy in the cross-validation framework using best linear unbiased prediction and coefficients of determination. Simulated data assuming additive, dominance, and epistatic gene action scenarios and real swine data were analyzed. We found that the joint use of additive and non-additive genomic kernel relationship matrices or non-parametric relationship matrices led to increased capturing of connectedness, up to 25%, and improved prediction accuracies compared to those of baseline additive relationship counterparts in the presence of non-additive gene action.
conclusionsOur findings showed that connectedness metrics can be extended to incorporate non-additive genetic variation of complex traits. Use of kernel relationship matrices designed to capture non-additive gene action increased measures of connectedness and improved whole-genome prediction accuracy, further broadening the scope of genomic connectedness studies.
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.