Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36161485›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2022

Adding gene transcripts into genomic prediction improves accuracy and reveals sampling time dependence.

Bruno C Perez, Marco C A M Bink, Karen L Svenson, Gary A Churchill, Mario P L Calus

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Prediction of disease resilience of pigs using multi-omics data.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bruno C PerezHendrix Genetics B.V., Research and Technology Center (RTC), 5830 AC Boxmeer, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7062-5263
Marco C A M BinkHendrix Genetics B.V., Research and Technology Center (RTC), 5830 AC Boxmeer, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1278-2092
Karen L SvensonThe Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, ME 04609, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7928-1911
Gary A ChurchillThe Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, ME 04609, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9190-9284
Mario P L CalusAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3213-704X
Hendrix Genetics (Netherlands) · NLJackson Laboratory · USWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

Systems Genetic Analysis of Multi-parent CrossesR01GM070683 · NIGMS · JACKSON LABORATORY · PI BROMAN, KARL W, CHURCHILL, GARY A · 2004 to 2022
$6.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM070683
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent developments allowed generating multiple high-quality 'omics' data that could increase the predictive performance of genomic prediction for phenotypes and genetic merit in animals and plants. Here, we have assessed the performance of parametric and nonparametric models that leverage transcriptomics in genomic prediction for 13 complex traits recorded in 478 animals from an outbred mouse population. Parametric models were implemented using the best linear unbiased prediction, while nonparametric models were implemented using the gradient boosting machine algorithm. We also propose a new model named GTCBLUP that aims to remove between-omics-layer covariance from predictors, whereas its counterpart GTBLUP does not do that. While gradient boosting machine models captured more phenotypic variation, their predictive performance did not exceed the best linear unbiased prediction models for most traits. Models leveraging gene transcripts captured higher proportions of the phenotypic variance for almost all traits when these were measured closer to the moment of measuring gene transcripts in the liver. In most cases, the combination of layers was not able to outperform the best single-omics models to predict phenotypes. Using only gene transcripts, the gradient boosting machine model was able to outperform best linear unbiased prediction for most traits except body weight, but the same pattern was not observed when using both single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes and gene transcripts. Although the GTCBLUP model was not able to produce the most accurate phenotypic predictions, it showed the highest accuracies for breeding values for 9 out of 13 traits. We recommend using the GTBLUP model for prediction of phenotypes and using the GTCBLUP for prediction of breeding values.

Indexed as

GenomeModels, GeneticAnimalsGenomicsGenotypeMicePhenotypePolymorphism, Single Nucleotidecomplex traitsgene transcriptsgenomic predictionoutbred mice

Identifiers

PMID36161485
PMCPMC9635642
OpenAlexW4297254562

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.