ArticleJournal of animal science and biotechnology2024
Improving the accuracy of genomic prediction in dairy cattle using the biologically annotated neural networks framework.
Article in Journal of animal science and biotechnology, 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
- Integrated Analysis of SNPs and Structural Variations via High-depth Whole-genome Sequencing Reveals the Genetic Architecture and Optimizes Genomic Prediction in Chickens.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Evaluating Adjusted ssGBLUP Models for Genomic Prediction and Matrix Compatibility in South African Holstein Cattle.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- From machine learning to digital twin integration for livestock production and research.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- A deep learning strategy for accurate identification of purebred and hybrid pigs across SNP chips.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Analysis of the genetic basis of fiber-related traits and flowering time in upland cotton using machine learning.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025Article
- Making sense of expanding transcriptomic data: network-based approaches for studying reproduction in domestic and wild animal species.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
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
backgroundBiologically annotated neural networks (BANNs) are feedforward Bayesian neural network models that utilize partially connected architectures based on SNP-set annotations. As an interpretable neural network, BANNs model SNP and SNP-set effects in their input and hidden layers, respectively. Furthermore, the weights and connections of the network are regarded as random variables with prior distributions reflecting the manifestation of genetic effects at various genomic scales. However, its application in genomic prediction has yet to be explored.
resultsThis study extended the BANNs framework to the area of genomic selection and explored the optimal SNP-set partitioning strategies by using dairy cattle datasets. The SNP-sets were partitioned based on two strategies-gene annotations and 100 kb windows, denoted as BANN_gene and BANN_100kb, respectively. The BANNs model was compared with GBLUP, random forest (RF), BayesB and BayesCπ through five replicates of five-fold cross-validation using genotypic and phenotypic data on milk production traits, type traits, and one health trait of 6,558, 6,210 and 5,962 Chinese Holsteins, respectively. Results showed that the BANNs framework achieves higher genomic prediction accuracy compared to GBLUP, RF and Bayesian methods. Specifically, the BANN_100kb demonstrated superior accuracy and the BANN_gene exhibited generally suboptimal accuracy compared to GBLUP, RF, BayesB and BayesCπ across all traits. The average accuracy improvements of BANN_100kb over GBLUP, RF, BayesB and BayesCπ were 4.86%, 3.95%, 3.84% and 1.92%, and the accuracy of BANN_gene was improved by 3.75%, 2.86%, 2.73% and 0.85% compared to GBLUP, RF, BayesB and BayesCπ, respectively across all seven traits. Meanwhile, both BANN_100kb and BANN_gene yielded lower overall mean square error values than GBLUP, RF and Bayesian methods.
conclusionOur findings demonstrated that the BANNs framework performed better than traditional genomic prediction methods in our tested scenarios, and might serve as a promising alternative approach for genomic prediction in dairy cattle.
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.