Technical note: Genomic evaluation for crossbred performance in a single-step approach with metafounders.
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] P. Ma,et al. Imputation of genotypes in Danish purebred and two-way crossbred pigs using low-density panels , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[2] M. Lund,et al. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped , 2010, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[3] Mary Sara McPeek,et al. Best Linear Unbiased Allele‐Frequency Estimation in Complex Pedigrees , 2004, Biometrics.
[4] N Gengler,et al. A simple method to approximate gene content in large pedigree populations: application to the myostatin gene in dual-purpose Belgian Blue cattle. , 2007, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.
[5] Ignacy Misztal,et al. Ancestral Relationships Using Metafounders: Finite Ancestral Populations and Across Population Relationships , 2015, Genetics.
[6] P. VanRaden,et al. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. , 2008, Journal of dairy science.
[7] A. Legarra,et al. Within- and across-breed genomic predictions and genomic relationships for Western Pyrenees dairy sheep breeds Latxa, Manech, and Basco-Béarnaise. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.
[8] J. Werf,et al. Maximizing genetic response in crossbreds using both purebred and crossbred information , 1994 .
[9] Ignacy Misztal,et al. BLUPF90 and related programs (BGF90) , 2002 .
[10] Quality Control of Genotypes Using Heritability Estimates of Gene Content at the Marker , 2014, Genetics.
[11] L. D. Vleck. Variance of prediction error with mixed model equations when relationships are ignored , 2004, Theoretical and Applied Genetics.
[12] L. A. García-Cortés,et al. Multibreed analysis by splitting the breeding values , 2006, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[13] P. Sørensen,et al. Genome-wide and local pattern of linkage disequilibrium and persistence of phase for 3 Danish pig breeds , 2013, BMC Genetics.
[14] Guosheng Su,et al. Genetic evaluation for three-way crossbreeding , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[15] J. K. Bertrand,et al. Animal model for genetic evaluation of multibreed data. , 1992, Journal of animal science.
[16] A Legarra,et al. Application of single-step genomic evaluation for crossbred performance in pig. , 2016, Journal of animal science.
[17] D. Falconer,et al. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. , 1962 .
[18] O. F. Christensen,et al. Compatibility of pedigree-based and marker-based relationship matrices for single-step genetic evaluation , 2012, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[19] Jean-Jacques Colleau,et al. An indirect approach to the extensive calculation of relationship coefficients , 2002, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[20] Ignacy Misztal,et al. Metafounders are related to Fst fixation indices and reduce bias in single-step genomic evaluations , 2017, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[21] Guosheng Su,et al. Genomic evaluation of both purebred and crossbred performances , 2014, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[22] Andrés Legarra,et al. Joint genomic evaluation of French dairy cattle breeds using multiple-trait models , 2012, Genetics Selection Evolution.
[23] R. Fernando,et al. Genetic evaluation by BLUP in two-breed terminal crossbreeding systems under dominance. , 1997, Journal of animal science.
[24] I Misztal,et al. A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.
[25] C. Cockerham,et al. VARIANCE OF GENE FREQUENCIES , 1969, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.
[26] B. Kennedy,et al. C. R. Henderson: the unfinished legacy. , 1991, Journal of dairy science.