Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33167865›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2020

Would large dataset sample size unveil the potential of deep neural networks for improved genome-enabled prediction of complex traits? The case for body weight in broilers.

Tiago L Passafaro, Fernando B Lopes, João R R Dórea, Mark Craven, Vivian Breen, Rachel J Hawken, Guilherme J M Rosa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Artificial intelligence in animal breeding and genetics: applications, opportunities, and challenges.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors.

Tiago L PassafaroDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.
Fernando B LopesCobb-Vantress Inc., Siloam Springs, AR, 72761, USA.
João R R DóreaDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.
Mark CravenDepartment of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.
Vivian BreenCobb-Vantress Inc., Siloam Springs, AR, 72761, USA.
Rachel J HawkenCobb-Vantress Inc., Siloam Springs, AR, 72761, USA.
Guilherme J M RosaDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA. grosa@wisc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9172-6461

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior BEX-13426133
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeep neural networks (DNN) are a particular case of artificial neural networks (ANN) composed by multiple hidden layers, and have recently gained attention in genome-enabled prediction of complex traits. Yet, few studies in genome-enabled prediction have assessed the performance of DNN compared to traditional regression models. Strikingly, no clear superiority of DNN has been reported so far, and results seem highly dependent on the species and traits of application. Nevertheless, the relatively small datasets used in previous studies, most with fewer than 5000 observations may have precluded the full potential of DNN. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the impact of the dataset sample size on the performance of DNN compared to Bayesian regression models for genome-enable prediction of body weight in broilers by sub-sampling 63,526 observations of the training set.

resultsPredictive performance of DNN improved as sample size increased, reaching a plateau at about 0.32 of prediction correlation when 60% of the entire training set size was used (i.e., 39,510 observations). Interestingly, DNN showed superior prediction correlation using up to 3% of training set, but poorer prediction correlation after that compared to Bayesian Ridge Regression (BRR) and Bayes Cπ. Regardless of the amount of data used to train the predictive machines, DNN displayed the lowest mean square error of prediction compared to all other approaches. The predictive bias was lower for DNN compared to Bayesian models, across all dataset sizes, with estimates close to one with larger sample sizes.

conclusionsDNN had worse prediction correlation compared to BRR and Bayes Cπ, but improved mean square error of prediction and bias relative to both Bayesian models for genome-enabled prediction of body weight in broilers. Such findings, highlights advantages and disadvantages between predictive approaches depending on the criterion used for comparison. Furthermore, the inclusion of more data per se is not a guarantee for the DNN to outperform the Bayesian regression methods commonly used for genome-enabled prediction. Nonetheless, further analysis is necessary to detect scenarios where DNN can clearly outperform Bayesian benchmark models.

Indexed as

ChickensMultifactorial InheritanceAnimalsBayes TheoremBody WeightNeural Networks, ComputerSample SizeAnd multilayer perceptronBody weightBroilersDeep neural networksGenome-enabled prediction

Identifiers

PMID33167865
PMCPMC7654004

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.