ArticleJournal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie2026
Genomic Prediction Ability for Novel Profitability Traits Using Different Models in Nelore Cattle.
Article in Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy, bias and dispersion of genomic predictions for accumulated profitability (APF) and profit per kilogram of liveweight gain (PFT) in Nelore cattle using different prediction approaches. The dataset consisted of 3969 phenotypic records for each trait. The pedigree harboured information from 38,930 animals born between 1998 and 2016, including 2691 sires and 19,884 dams. A total of 2449 animals were genotyped using the Clarifide Nelore 3.0 SNP panel. Nine models for genomic prediction were evaluated: a linear animal model was applied to estimate genetic parameters and perform the genomic single-trait best linear unbiased prediction (ST_ss-default). Additionally, a two-trait (ssGBLUP TT_W450 and TT_DMI), three-trait (TTT_CAR) and multi-trait ssGBLUP (MT_ss) were tested. Finally, two models employing the weighted linear (ST_sswl1 and ST_sswl2) and non-linear (ST_sswnl1 and ST_sswnl2) single-step genomic approach (WssGBLUP) were used to predict genomic breeding values (GEBV). The ability to predict future performance was assessed by calculating the correlation between GEBV and adjusted phenotypes. The average prediction accuracy of the GEBV models ranged from 0.345 to 0.665 for PFT and from 0.425 to 0.603 for APF. The predictive capability of the MT_ss model (0.665) was significantly higher than that of the other models for PFT, except for the TTT_CAR model (0.604), which also showed an improvement in predictive performance. For APF, the MT_ss (0.561) and TT_W450 (0.556) models demonstrated improved genomic prediction accuracy compared to the other models. In general, the single trait ssGBLUP (ST_ss-default) models and the non-linear weighting approach did not enhance prediction accuracy for either trait. For the phenotypic prediction ability of PFT, the linear WssGBLUP models ST_sswl1 (0.65) and ST_sswl2 (0.70), TT_W450 (0.64) and ssGBLUP-M (0.66) demonstrated the highest prediction accuracies. Similar results were observed for the phenotypic prediction ability of APF for both models. However, the linear WssGBLUP models ST_sswl1 (0.84) and ST_sswl2 (0.94) provided higher prediction performance compared to the two-, three- and multi-trait models. The results indicate that the multi-trait model achieved better predictive ability for the novel traits PFT and APF. Multi-trait genomic selection may yield greater genetic gains than other models for these forthcoming economically important traits in breeding programmes.
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.