Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32787772›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2020

Bias and accuracy of dairy sheep evaluations using BLUP and SSGBLUP with metafounders and unknown parent groups.

Fernando L Macedo, Ole F Christensen, Jean-Michel Astruc, Ignacio Aguilar, Yutaka Masuda, Andrés Legarra

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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
  3. Article
  4. Genomic Evaluation in Nellore Cattle for Reproductive Traits: Multiple Ways to Account for Missing Pedigrees.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Strategies for genomic predictions of an indicine multi-breed population using single-step GBLUP.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Definition of metafounders based on population structure analysis.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Including genotypic information in genetic evaluations increases the accuracy of sheep breeding values.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2023
    Article
  19. Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2023
    Article
  20. SNP- and haplotype-based single-step genomic predictions for body weight, wool, and reproductive traits in North American Rambouillet sheep.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2023
    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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Fernando L MacedoGenPhySE, INRAE, 31326, Castanet Tolosan, France. fernando.macedo@inrae.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1949-9214
Ole F ChristensenCenter for Quantitative Genetics and Genomics, Blichers Allé 20, 8830, Tjele, Denmark.
Jean-Michel AstrucInstitut de l'Elevage, CS52627, 31326, Castanet Tolosan, France.
Ignacio AguilarInstituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Yutaka MasudaDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Andrés LegarraGenPhySE, INRAE, 31326, Castanet Tolosan, France.
Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement · FRInstitut de l’Elevage · FRInstituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria · UYUniversity of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBias has been reported in genetic or genomic evaluations of several species. Common biases are systematic differences between averages of estimated and true breeding values, and their over- or under-dispersion. In addition, comparing accuracies of pedigree versus genomic predictions is a difficult task. This work proposes to analyse biases and accuracies in the genetic evaluation of milk yield in Manech Tête Rousse dairy sheep, over several years, by testing five models and using the estimators of the linear regression method. We tested models with and without genomic information [best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) and single-step genomic BLUP (SSGBLUP)] and using three strategies to handle missing pedigree [unknown parent groups (UPG), UPG with QP transformation in the [Formula: see text] matrix (EUPG) and metafounders (MF)].

methodsWe compared estimated breeding values (EBV) of selected rams at birth with the EBV of the same rams obtained each year from the first daughters with phenotypes up to 2017. We compared within and across models. Finally, we compared EBV at birth of the rams with and without genomic information.

resultsWithin models, bias and over-dispersion were small (bias: 0.20 to 0.40 genetic standard deviations; slope of the dispersion: 0.95 to 0.99) except for model SSGBLUP-EUPG that presented an important over-dispersion (0.87). The estimates of accuracies confirm that the addition of genomic information increases the accuracy of EBV in young rams. The smallest bias was observed with BLUP-MF and SSGBLUP-MF. When we estimated dispersion by comparing a model with no markers to models with markers, SSGBLUP-MF showed a value close to 1, indicating that there was no problem in dispersion, whereas SSGBLUP-EUPG and SSGBLUP-UPG showed a significant under-dispersion. Another important observation was the heterogeneous behaviour of the estimates over time, which suggests that a single check could be insufficient to make a good analysis of genetic/genomic evaluations.

conclusionsThe addition of genomic information increases the accuracy of EBV of young rams in Manech Tête Rousse. In this population that has missing pedigrees, the use of UPG and EUPG in SSGBLUP produced bias, whereas MF yielded unbiased estimates, and we recommend its use. We also recommend assessing biases and accuracies using multiple truncation points, since these statistics are subject to random variation across years.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiasBreedingFemaleGenome-Wide Association StudyMaleMilkPedigreePolymorphism, GeneticQuantitative Trait LociSheep

Identifiers

PMID32787772
PMCPMC7425573
OpenAlexW3048366608

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.