ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019
Theoretical Evaluation of Multi-Breed Genomic Prediction in Chinese Indigenous Cattle.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Multi-Breed Genomic Prediction Models for Carcass and Reproductive Traits in Zebu Beef Cattle.Animal genetics · 2026Article
- Comparison of GBLUP and WGBLUP in genomic selection for beef cattle under different LD patterns and mixed multi-population scenarios: a simulation study.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Multi-Omic Analysis of the Differences in Growth and Metabolic Mechanisms Between Chinese Domestic Cattle and Simmental Crossbred Cattle.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Genomic prediction based on a joint reference population for the Xinjiang Brown cattle.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Genomic Prediction of Additive and Dominant Effects on Wool and Blood Traits in Alpine Merino Sheep.Frontiers in veterinary 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic selection (GS) has been widely considered as a valuable strategy for enhancing the rate of genetic gain in farm animals. However, the construction of a large reference population is a big challenge for small populations like indigenous cattle. In order to evaluate the potential application of GS for Chinese indigenous cattle, we assessed the influence of combining multiple populations on the reliability of genomic predictions for 10 indigenous breeds of Chinese cattle using simulated data. Also, we examined the effect of different genetic architecture on prediction accuracy. In this study, we simulated a set of genotype data by a resampling approach which can reflect the realistic linkage disequilibrium pattern for multiple populations. We found within-breed evaluations yielded the highest accuracies ranged from 0.64 to 0.68 for four different simulated genetic architectures. For scenarios using multiple breeds as reference, the predictive accuracies were higher when the reference was comprised of breeds with a close relationship, while the accuracies were low when prediction were carried out among breeds. In addition, the accuracy increased in all scenarios with the heritability increased. Our results suggested that using meta-population as reference can increase accuracy of genomic predictions for small populations. Moreover, multi-breed genomic selection was feasible for Chinese indigenous populations with genetic relationships.
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.