Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30400768›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2018

Semi-parametric estimates of population accuracy and bias of predictions of breeding values and future phenotypes using the LR method.

Andres Legarra, Antonio Reverter

Erratum issuedAbstract 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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 149 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
149citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

149 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Better Multi-Breed Genomic Predictions for Tropical Bull Fertility Using a Breed-Adjusted Genomic Relationship Matrix.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Contribution of Fat Adjustment to Residual Feed Intake Estimation in Beef Cattle.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Genetic Evaluation of Beef Sires Using a Beef-on-Dairy Crossbred Reference Population.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Genomic Prediction Ability Using Linear and Threshold Approaches for Different Stayability Definitions in Nellore Females.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  17. Impact of Model Parameterisation and Variance Component Estimates on Genomic Predictions of Carcass Traits in Montana Composite Cattle.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Genomic Prediction Ability for Novel Profitability Traits Using Different Models in Nelore Cattle.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  20. Review

89 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andres LegarraINRA, UMR1388 GenPhySE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France. andres.legarra@inra.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8893-7620
Antonio ReverterCSIRO Agriculture and Food, 306 Carmody Rd., St. Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia.

Funding

FEDER GenopyrINRA-CSIRO Exchange programInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique metaprogram SelGen: EpiSel SelHet OptiMagicsPoctefa/FEDER ARDI
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCross-validation tools are used increasingly to validate and compare genetic evaluation methods but analytical properties of cross-validation methods are rarely described. There is also a lack of cross-validation tools for complex problems such as prediction of indirect effects (e.g. maternal effects) or for breeding schemes with small progeny group sizes.

resultsWe derive the expected value of several quadratic forms by comparing genetic evaluations including "partial" and "whole" data. We propose statistics that compare genetic evaluations including "partial" and "whole" data based on differences in means, covariance, and correlation, and term the use of these statistics "method LR" (from linear regression). Contrary to common belief, the regression of true on estimated breeding values is (on expectation) lower than 1 for small or related validation sets, due to family structures. For validation sets that are sufficiently large, we show that these statistics yield estimators of bias, slope or dispersion, and population accuracy for estimated breeding values. Similar results hold for prediction of future phenotypes although we show that estimates of bias, slope or dispersion using prediction of future phenotypes are sensitive to incorrect heritabilities or precorrection for fixed effects. We present an example for a set of 2111 Brahman beef cattle for which, in repeated partitioning of the data into training and validation sets, there is very good agreement of statistics of method LR with prediction of future phenotypes.

conclusionsAnalytical properties of cross-validation measures are presented. We present a new method named LR for cross-validation that is automatic, easy to use, and which yields the quantities of interest. The method compares predictions based on partial and whole data, which results in estimates of accuracy and biases. Prediction of observed records may yield biased results due to precorrection or use of incorrect heritabilities.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticAnimalsBreedingCattleFemaleGenotypeLinear ModelsMalePhenotypeQuantitative Trait, Heritable

Identifiers

PMID30400768
PMCPMC6219059

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.