Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35164676›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2022

Predictions of the accuracy of genomic prediction: connecting R

Piter Bijma, Jack C M Dekkers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Piter BijmaAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Animal Sciences Group, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands. piter.bijma@wur.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9005-9131
Jack C M DekkersDepartment of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.

Funding

U.S. Department of Agriculture 2017-67015-26299
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeterministic predictions of the accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) when combining information sources have been developed based on selection index theory (SIT) and on Fisher information (FI). These two approaches have resulted in slightly different results when considering the combination of pedigree and genomic information. Here, we clarify this apparent contradiction, both for the combination of pedigree and genomic information and for the combination of subpopulations into a joint reference population.

resultsFirst, we show that existing expressions for the squared accuracy of GEBV can be understood as a proportion of the variance explained. Next, we show that the apparent discrepancy that has been observed between accuracies based on SIT vs. FI originated from two sources. First, the FI referred to the genetic component that is captured by the marker genotypes, rather than the full genetic component. Second, the common SIT-based derivations did not account for the increase in the accuracy of GEBV due to a reduction of the residual variance when combining information sources. The SIT and FI approaches are equivalent when these sources are accounted for.

conclusionsThe squared accuracy of GEBV can be understood as a proportion of the variance explained. The SIT and FI approaches for combining information for GEBV are equivalent and provide identical accuracies when the underlying assumptions are equivalent.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticPolymorphism, Single NucleotideGenomeGenomicsGenotypePedigreePhenotype

Identifiers

PMID35164676
PMCPMC8842959

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.