ArticleBMC genomics2020
Performances of Adaptive MultiBLUP, Bayesian regressions, and weighted-GBLUP approaches for genomic predictions in Belgian Blue beef cattle.
Article in BMC genomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Parameters and Weighted Single-Step Genome-Wide Association Studies of Fertility Traits in Chinese Holstein.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- CWAGS: multi-trait genomic selection using channel weighted attention convolutional network.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Improving genomic prediction accuracy of complex traits by integrating massive types of functional annotation information.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Genomic information increases prediction accuracy of behavior traits of Labrador Retrievers used as guide dogs.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2026Article
- Enhancing genomic prediction ability of blast resistance using genome-wide association study-derived marker weights in two rice (Oryza sativa L.) populations.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 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
- Assessing the Impact of Different Mixing Strategies on Genomic Prediction Accuracy for Beef Cattle Breeding Values in Multi-Breed Genomic Prediction.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Weighted GBLUP in Simulated Beef Cattle Populations: Impact of Reference Population, Marker Density, and Heritability.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Evaluation of genomic selection models using whole genome sequence data and functional annotation in Belgian Blue cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2025Article
- mtPGS: Leverage multiple correlated traits for accurate polygenic score construction.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- Using pre-selected variants from large-scale whole-genome sequence data for single-step genomic predictions in pigs.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2023Article
- Multi-line ssGBLUP evaluation using preselected markers from whole-genome sequence data in pigs.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Improvement of Genomic Predictions in Small Breeds by Construction of Genomic Relationship Matrix Through Variable Selection.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Single-Step Genomic Evaluations from Theory to Practice: Using SNP Chips and Sequence Data in BLUPF90.Genes · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenomic selection has been successfully implemented in many livestock and crop species. The genomic best linear unbiased predictor (GBLUP) approach, assigning equal variance to all SNP effects, is one of the reference methods. When large-effect variants contribute to complex traits, it has been shown that genomic prediction methods that assign a higher variance to subsets of SNP effects can achieve higher prediction accuracy. We herein compared the efficiency of several such approaches, including the Adaptive MultiBLUP (AM-BLUP) that uses local genomic relationship matrices (GRM) to automatically identify and weight genomic regions with large effects, to predict genetic merit in Belgian Blue beef cattle.
resultsWe used a population of approximately 10,000 genotyped cows and their phenotypes for 14 traits, mostly related to muscular development and body dimensions. According to the trait, we found that 4 to 25% of the genetic variance could be associated with 2 to 12 genomic regions harbouring large-effect variants. Noteworthy, three previously identified recessive deleterious variants presented heterozygote advantage and were among the most significant SNPs for several traits. The AM-BLUP resulted in increased reliability of genomic predictions compared to GBLUP (+ 2%), but Bayesian methods proved more efficient (+ 3%). Overall, the reliability gains remained thus limited although higher gains were observed for skin thickness, a trait affected by two genomic regions having particularly large effects. Higher accuracies than those from the original AM-BLUP were achieved when applying the Bayesian Sparse Linear Mixed Model to pre-select groups of SNPs with large effects and subsequently use their estimated variance to build a weighted GRM. Finally, the single-step GBLUP performed best and could be further improved (+ 3% prediction accuracy) by using these weighted GRM.
conclusionsThe AM-BLUP is an attractive method to automatically identify and weight genomic regions with large effects on complex traits. However, the method was less accurate than Bayesian methods. Overall, weighted methods achieved modest accuracy gains compared to GBLUP. Nevertheless, the computational efficiency of the AM-BLUP might be valuable at higher marker density, including with whole-genome sequencing data. Furthermore, weighted GRM are particularly useful to account for large variance loci in the single-step GBLUP.
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.