ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2024
Residual networks without pooling layers improve the accuracy of genomic predictions.
Article in TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- From linear models to deep learning: statistical advances in genomic selection for animal breeding.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2026Review
- CWAGS: multi-trait genomic selection using channel weighted attention convolutional network.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- MoEGP: an efficient crop genomic prediction approach based on the mixture of experts network.Plant methods · 2026Article
- ReaGP: integrating residual units and attention mechanisms in convolution neural network for genomic prediction.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2026Article
- Crop phenotype prediction using SNP context and whole-genome feature embedding based on DNABERT-2.Plant methods · 2026Article
- Article
- WheatGP, a genomic prediction method based on CNN and LSTM.Briefings in bioinformatics · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
key messageResidual neural network genomic selection is the first GS algorithm to reach 35 layers, and its prediction accuracy surpasses previous algorithms. With the decrease in DNA sequencing costs and the development of deep learning, phenotype prediction accuracy by genomic selection (GS) continues to improve. Residual networks, a widely validated deep learning technique, are introduced to deep learning for GS. Since each locus has a different weighted impact on the phenotype, strided convolutions are more suitable for GS problems than pooling layers. Through the above technological innovations, we propose a GS deep learning algorithm, residual neural network for genomic selection (ResGS). ResGS is the first neural network to reach 35 layers in GS. In 15 cases from four public data, the prediction accuracy of ResGS is higher than that of ridge-regression best linear unbiased prediction, support vector regression, random forest, gradient boosting regressor, and deep neural network genomic prediction in most cases. ResGS performs well in dealing with gene-environment interaction. Phenotypes from other environments are imported into ResGS along with genetic data. The prediction results are much better than just providing genetic data as input, which demonstrates the effectiveness of GS multi-modal learning. Standard deviation is recommended as an auxiliary GS evaluation metric, which could improve the distribution of predicted results. Deep learning for GS, such as ResGS, is becoming more accurate in phenotype prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38771334What 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.