Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36690938›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2023

Reliabilities of estimated breeding values in models with metafounders.

Matias Bermann, Ignacio Aguilar, Daniela Lourenco, Ignacy Misztal, Andres Legarra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Indirect Genomic Predictions for Indicine Cattle Breeds With SNP Effects From a Multi-Breed Genomic Evaluation.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genomic evaluation for two-way crossbred performance in cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2023
    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.

Matias BermannDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA. mbermann@uga.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5374-0710
Ignacio AguilarInstituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA), Montevideo, Uruguay.
Daniela LourencoDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Ignacy MisztalDepartment of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
Andres LegarraGenPhySE, INRAE, ENVT, Université de Toulouse, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France.

Funding

HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council 772787National Institute of Food and Agriculture 2020-67015-31030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReliabilities of best linear unbiased predictions (BLUP) of breeding values are defined as the squared correlation between true and estimated breeding values and are helpful in assessing risk and genetic gain. Reliabilities can be computed from the prediction error variances for models with a single base population but are undefined for models that include several base populations and when unknown parent groups are modeled as fixed effects. In such a case, the use of metafounders in principle enables reliabilities to be derived.

methodsWe propose to compute the reliability of the contrast of an individual's estimated breeding value with that of a metafounder based on the prediction error variances of the individual and the metafounder, their prediction error covariance, and their genetic relationship. Computation of the required terms demands only little extra work once the sparse inverse of the mixed model equations is obtained, or they can be approximated. This also allows the reliabilities of the metafounders to be obtained. We studied the reliabilities for both BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP), using several definitions of reliability in a large dataset with 1,961,687 dairy sheep and rams, most of which had phenotypes and among which 27,000 rams were genotyped with a 50K single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chip. There were 23 metafounders with progeny sizes between 100,000 and 2000 individuals.

resultsIn models with metafounders, directly using the prediction error variance instead of the contrast with a metafounder leads to artificially low reliabilities because they refer to a population with maximum heterozygosity. When only one metafounder is fitted in the model, the reliability of the contrast is shown to be equivalent to the reliability of the individual in a model without metafounders. When there are several metafounders in the model, using a contrast with the oldest metafounder yields reliabilities that are on a meaningful scale and very close to reliabilities obtained from models without metafounders. The reliabilities using contrasts with ssGBLUP also resulted in meaningful values.

conclusionsThis work provides a general method to obtain reliabilities for both BLUP and ssGBLUP when several base populations are included through metafounders.

Indexed as

GenomeModels, GeneticAnimalsGenomicsGenotypeMalePedigreePhenotypeReproducibility of ResultsSheep

Identifiers

PMID36690938
PMCPMC9869531

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.