ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2025
Genomic selection in pig breeding: comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms.
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. Cited by 11 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
11 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
- Impact of QTL number, heritability and reference population size on the benefit of machine learning models over GBLUP in genomic prediction.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2026Article
- Gsformer: a dual-architecture deep learning framework with CNN-self-attention and sparse-attention for genomic selection.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2026Article
- Enhancing genomic prediction for key production traits in chickens through ultrasound phenotyping and multi-model comparative analysis.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based individualized prediction: risk assessment of retinopathy in preterm infants at high altitude.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Candidate Gene Identification and Genomic Prediction for Key Reproductive Traits in Yorkshire, Landrace, and Duroc Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Genomic prediction of feed efficiency in boars by deep learning.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Genetic Strategies for Improving Pig Robustness: Reducing Antibiotic Use Through Enhanced Resilience and Disease Resistance.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- A Self-Supervised Pre-Trained Transformer Model for Accurate Genomic Prediction of Swine Phenotypes.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Multi-task genomic prediction using gated residual variable selection neural networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Identification of immune and major depressive disorder-related diagnostic markers for early nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by WGCNA and machine learning.Frontiers 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of genomic prediction (GP) significantly influences breeding progress, and employing SNP markers to predict phenotypic values is a pivotal aspect of pig breeding. Machine learning (ML) methods are usually used to predict phenotypic values since their advantages in processing high dimensional data. While, the existing researches have not indicated which ML methods are suitable for most pig genomic prediction. Therefore, it is necessary to select appropriate methods from a large number of ML methods as long as genomic prediction is performed. This paper compared the performance of popular ML methods in predicting pig phenotypes and then found out suitable methods for most traits.
resultsIn this paper, five commonly used datasets from other literatures were utilized to compare the performance of different ML methods. The experimental results demonstrate that Stacking performs best on the PIC dataset where the trait information is hidden, and the performs of kernel ridge regression with rbf kernel (KRR-rbf) closely follows. Support vector regression (SVR) performs best in predicting reproductive traits, followed by genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP). GBLUP achieves the best performance on growth traits, with SVR as the second best.
conclusionsGBLUP achieves good performance for GP problems. Similarly, the Stacking, SVR, and KRR-RBF methods also achieve high prediction accuracy. Moreover, LR statistical analysis shows that Stacking, SVR and KRR are stable. When applying ML methods for phenotypic values prediction in pigs, we recommend these three approaches.
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.