ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2023
How economic weights translate into genetic and phenotypic progress, and vice versa.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncertainty-aware breeding decisions: MCMC-based optimum contribution selection increases breeding decision robustness.Genetics · 2026Article
- Analysis of different genotyping and selection strategies in laying hen breeding programs.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis paper highlights the relationships between economic weights, genetic progress, and phenotypic progress in genomic breeding programs that aim at generating genetic progress in complex, i.e., multi-trait, breeding objectives via a combination of estimated breeding values for different trait complexes.
resultsBased on classical selection index theory in combination with quantitative genetic models, we provide a methodological framework for calculating expected genetic and phenotypic progress for all components of a complex breeding objective. We further provide an approach to study the sensitivity of the system to modifications, e.g. to changes in the economic weights. We propose a novel approach to derive the covariance structure of the stochastic errors of estimated breeding values from the observed correlations of estimated breeding values. We define 'realized economic weights' as those weights that would coincide with the observed composition of the genetic trend and show, how they can be calculated. The suggested methodology is illustrated with an index that aims at achieving a breeding goal composed of six trait complexes, that was applied in German Holstein cattle breeding until 2021.
conclusionsBased on the presented results, the main conclusions are (i) the composition of the observed genetic progress matches the expectations well, with predictions being slightly better when the covariance of estimation errors is taken into account; (ii) the composition of the expected phenotypic trend deviates significantly from the expected genetic trend due to the differences in trait heritabilities; and (iii) the realized economic weights derived from the observed genetic trend deviate substantially from the predefined ones, in one case even with a reversed sign. Further results highlight the implications of the change to a modified breeding goal based on the example of a new index comprising eight, partly new, trait complexes, which is used since 2021 in the German Holstein breeding program. The proposed framework and the analytical tools and software provided will be useful to define more rational and generally accepted breeding objectives in the future.
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.