ReviewJournal of animal science2026
Opportunities and computational challenges in large-scale whole-genome sequencing data analysis.
Review in Journal of animal science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Beef Improvement Federation Genetic Prediction Workshop: opportunities and obstacles to enhancing beef cattle evaluation with sequence data.Journal of animal science · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic selection has been used in animal breeding for c. 15 yr and continues to be an important tool in predicting genetic merit in livestock populations. The dairy cattle industry was the first to adopt genomic selection, initially based on some 50K single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays for thousands of animals. Later advances in genome-scanning technologies have enabled inexpensive genotyping and sequencing, leading to wider adoption, and constantly increasing amounts of genomic data, both as to the number of genotyped animals and variants genotyped per animal. Full sequence data are expected to supersede SNP chips in the coming years. We review the methods and computational approaches used with sequence data and the impact of the methods and model assumptions on genomic prediction accuracy. The modeling, development, and applicability of these methods to sequence data are discussed, as well as the computational resources required. Sequence data should, in principle, provide full information on genetic variability, which should lead to higher prediction accuracy. In practice, there is limited evidence of additional benefit from using sequence data over medium- or high-density SNP panels. This is particularly true for small effective population sizes (Ne) such as cattle populations, where animals within a breed have many common ancestors and thus longer chromosome segments with high linkage disequilibrium accurately trackable with a relatively small number of markers. A population with a small N has long haplotype blocks, from 1 to 5 Mb, making it hard to identify causal variants within blocks. However, in major cattle breeds, a medium-density SNP panel is sufficient to tag the blocks themselves, and prediction with large datasets is highly accurate. Clearly, sequence data should not be used directly for genomic prediction, but for identifying putative causal variants to improve the accuracy and stability of subsequent predictions. We show that the best strategy to deal with any large data with high SNP densities is to use only a subset of (important) markers and determine the most appropriate model for exploiting the preselected variants in the genomic evaluation. Novel prediction methods that subset trait-specific informative markers could offer the advantage of using sequence data by potentially linking individuals through underlying functional variants rather than simply through shared haplotype blocks inherited from ancestors. Further research is required to clarify this aspect.
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.