ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2025
Is there an advantage of using genomic information to estimate gametic variances and improve recurrent selection in animal populations?
Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGametic variances can be predicted from the outcomes of a genomic prediction for any genotyped individual. This is widely used in plant breeding, applying the utility criterion (UC). This paper aims to examine the conditions to use UC for recurrent selection in livestock. Here, the UC for a selection candidate is the linear combination of the expected value of the future progeny (half of the candidate's breeding value) and its predicted gametic variance weighted by a coefficient
resultsFirst, generalizing previous results, we derived analytically the ratio of the variance of the candidate's gametic variance and that of half of the candidate's breeding value. This ratio depends strongly on the number of quantitative trait loci (QTL) affecting the trait and, to a lesser extent, on the distribution of QTL allele frequencies: highly unbalanced frequencies and a limited number of QTL (< 10) favor higher values of the ratio. Then, changes in average breeding values and genetic variances when recurrent selection in a population of infinite size is applied were analytically derived and analyzed for selection up to 15 generations: in this ideal situation, after 5 to 10 generations (depending on
conclusionsWe conclude that the key factor to choose selection on UC rather than on estimated breeding values is the ratio between the variance of the gametic standard deviations and the variance of the breeding values (GEBV), which should be carefully evaluated.
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.