ArticleJournal of animal science2020
Impact of inclusion rates of crossbred phenotypes and genotypes in nucleus selection programs.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Leveraging data from commercial cattle for genetic improvement- an international perspective.Journal of animal science · 2025Review
- Improving the accuracy of genomic prediction for meat quality traits using whole genome sequence data in pigs.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Genomic prediction in pigs using data from a commercial crossbred population: insights from the Duroc x (Landrace x Yorkshire) three-way crossbreeding system.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2023Article
- Leveraging low-density crossbred genotypes to offset crossbred phenotypes and their impact on purebred predictions.Journal of animal science · 2022Article
- Genotyping and phenotyping strategies for genetic improvement of meat quality and carcass composition in swine.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2022Article
- Imputation of non-genotyped F1 dams to improve genetic gain in swine crossbreeding programs.Journal of animal science · 2022Article
- Bias in variance component estimation in swine crossbreeding schemes using selective genotyping and phenotyping strategies.Journal of animal science · 2021Article
- Review: optimizing genomic selection for crossbred performance by model improvement and data collection.Journal of animal science · 2021Review
- Assessing the statistical training in animal science graduate programs in the United States: survey on statistical training.Journal of animal science · 2021Article
- Selective genotyping and phenotypic data inclusion strategies of crossbred progeny for combined crossbred and purebred selection in swine breeding.Journal of animal science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous methods have been suggested to incorporate crossbred (CB) phenotypes and genotypes into swine selection programs, yet little research has focused on the implicit trade-off decisions between generating data at the nucleus or commercial level. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of altering the proportion of purebred (PB) and CB phenotypes and genotypes in genetic evaluations on the response to selection of CB performance. Assuming CB and PB performance with moderate heritabilities (h2=0.4), a three-breed swine crossbreeding scheme was simulated and selection was practiced for six generations, where the goal was to increase CB performance. Phenotypes, genotypes, and pedigrees for three PB breeds (25 and 175 mating males and females for each breed, respectively), F1 crosses (400 mating females), and terminal cross progeny (2,500) were simulated. The genome consisted of 18 chromosomes with 1,800 quantitative trait loci and 72k single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers. Selection was performed in PB breeds using estimated breeding value for each phenotyping/genotyping strategy. Strategies investigated were: 1) increasing the proportion of CB with genotypes, phenotypes, and sire pedigree relationships, 2) decreasing the proportion of PB phenotypes and genotypes, and 3) altering the genetic correlation between PB and CB performance (rpc). Each unique rpc scenario and data collection strategy was replicated 10 times. Results showed that including CB data improved the CB performance regardless of rpc or data collection strategy compared with when no CB data were included. Compared with using only PB information, including 10% of CB progeny per generation with sire pedigrees and phenotypes increased the response in CB phenotype by 134%, 55%, 33%, 23%, and 21% when rpc was 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, and 0.9, respectively. When the same 10% of CB progeny were also genotyped, CB performance increased by 243%, 54%, 38%, 23%, and 20% when the rpc was 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, and 0.9, respectively, compared with when no CB data were utilized. Minimal change was observed in the average CB phenotype when PB phenotypes were included or proportionally removed when CB were genotyped. Removal of both PB phenotypes and genotypes when CB were genotyped greatly reduced the response in CB performance. In practice, the optimal inclusion rate of CB and PB data depends upon the genetic correlation between CB and PB animals and the expense of additional CB data collection compared with the economic benefit associated with increased CB performance.
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.