ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2022
On the equivalence between marker effect models and breeding value models and direct genomic values with the Algorithm for Proven and Young.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Estimation of (co)variance components for very large datasets and complex single-step genomic models.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2025Article
- Article
- Optimizing the performance of large genomic evaluations through data truncation in Angus cattle.Journal of animal science · 2025Article
- Marker effect p-values for single-step GWAS with the algorithm for proven and young in large genotyped populations.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2024Article
- Short Communication: Reduced GBLUP equations to core animals in the algorithm for proven and young (APY).Veterinary and animal science · 2024Article
- Reviewing the definition of mortality in broiler chickens and its implications in genomic evaluations.Journal of animal science · 2024Article
- Temporal dynamics of genetic parameters and SNP effects for performance and disorder traits in poultry undergoing genomic selection.Journal of animal science · 2024Article
- Extension of the reduced animal model to single-step methods.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
- Derivation of indirect predictions using genomic recursions across generations in a broiler population.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
- Efficient ways to combine data from broiler and layer chickens to account for sequential genomic selection.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSingle-step genomic predictions obtained from a breeding value model require calculating the inverse of the genomic relationship matrix [Formula: see text]. The Algorithm for Proven and Young (APY) creates a sparse representation of [Formula: see text] with a low computational cost. APY consists of selecting a group of core animals and expressing the breeding values of the remaining animals as a linear combination of those from the core animals plus an error term. The objectives of this study were to: (1) extend APY to marker effects models; (2) derive equations for marker effect estimates when APY is used for breeding value models, and (3) show the implication of selecting a specific group of core animals in terms of a marker effects model.
resultsWe derived a family of marker effects models called APY-SNP-BLUP. It differs from the classic marker effects model in that the row space of the genotype matrix is reduced and an error term is fitted for non-core animals. We derived formulas for marker effect estimates that take this error term in account. The prediction error variance (PEV) of the marker effect estimates depends on the PEV for core animals but not directly on the PEV of the non-core animals. We extended the APY-SNP-BLUP to include a residual polygenic effect and accommodate non-genotyped animals. We show that selecting a specific group of core animals is equivalent to select a subspace of the row space of the genotype matrix. As the number of core animals increases, subspaces corresponding to different sets of core animals tend to overlap, showing that random selection of core animals is algebraically justified.
conclusionsThe APY-(ss)GBLUP models can be expressed in terms of marker effect models. When the number of core animals is equal to the rank of the genotype matrix, APY-SNP-BLUP is identical to the classic marker effects model. If the number of core animals is less than the rank of the genotype matrix, genotypes for non-core animals are imputed as a linear combination of the genotypes of the core animals. For estimating SNP effects, only relationships and estimated breeding values for core animals are needed.
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.