ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2022
A comprehensive study on size and definition of the core group in the proven and young algorithm for single-step GBLUP.
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. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- GAPIT version 4: integration of GWAS into genomic prediction.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Decreasing the computing time of approximated reliabilities of genomic estimated breeding values in the single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor using different core sizes for the algorithm for proven and young.JDS communications · 2026Article
- Prioritization of SNP markers for genomic prediction in closed beef cattle populations.Translational animal science · 2026Article
- Estimation of heritabilities and genetic correlations by time slices using predictivity in large genomic models.Genetics · 2025Article
- Efficient large-scale genomic prediction in approximate genome-based kernel model.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2024Article
- Marker effect p-values for single-step GWAS with the algorithm for proven and young in large genotyped populations.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2024Article
- Preselecting Variants from Large-Scale Genome-Wide Association Study Meta-Analyses Increases the Genomic Prediction Accuracy of Growth and Carcass Traits in Large White Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- HIBLUP: an integration of statistical models on the BLUP framework for efficient genetic evaluation using big genomic data.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Optimisation of the core subset for the APY approximation of genomic relationships.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe algorithm for proven and young (APY) has been suggested as a solution for recursively computing a sparse representation for the inverse of a large genomic relationship matrix (G). In APY, a subset of genotyped individuals is used as the core and the remaining genotyped individuals are used as noncore. Size and definition of the core are relevant research subjects for the application of APY, especially given the ever-increasing number of genotyped individuals.
methodsThe aim of this study was to investigate several core definitions, including the most popular animals (MPA) (i.e., animals with high contributions to the genetic pool), the least popular males (LPM), the least popular females (LPF), a random set (Rnd), animals evenly distributed across genealogical paths (Ped), unrelated individuals (Unrel), or based on within-family selection (Fam), or on decomposition of the gene content matrix (QR). Each definition was evaluated for six core sizes based on prediction accuracy of single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) with APY. Prediction accuracy of ssGBLUP with the full inverse of G was used as the baseline. The dataset consisted of 357k pedigreed Duroc pigs with 111k pigs with genotypes and ~ 220k phenotypic records.
resultsWhen the core size was equal to the number of largest eigenvalues explaining 50% of the variation of G (n = 160), MPA and Ped core definitions delivered the highest average prediction accuracies (~ 0.41-0.53). As the core size increased to the number of eigenvalues explaining 99% of the variation in G (n = 7320), prediction accuracy was nearly identical for all core types and correlations with genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) from ssGBLUP with the full inversion of G were greater than 0.99 for all core definitions. Cores that represent all generations, such as Rnd, Ped, Fam, and Unrel, were grouped together in the hierarchical clustering of GEBV.
conclusionsFor small core sizes, the definition of the core matters; however, as the size of the core reaches an optimal value equal to the number of largest eigenvalues explaining 99% of the variation of G, the definition of the core becomes arbitrary.
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.