The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Accuracy of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals predicted by dense SNP genotyping
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Recent developments in SNP discovery and high throughput genotyping technology have made the use of high-density SNP markers to predict breeding values feasible. This involves estimation of the SNP effects in a training data set, and use of these estimates to evaluate the breeding values of other 'evaluation' individuals. Simulation studies have shown that these predictions of breeding values can be accurate, when training and evaluation individuals are (closely) related. However, many general applications of genomic selection require the prediction of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals, i.e. individuals from the same population, but not particularly closely related to the training individuals. METHODS: Accuracy of selection was investigated by computer simulation of small populations. Using scaling arguments, the results were extended to different populations, training data sets and genome sizes, and different trait heritabilities. RESULTS: Prediction of breeding values of unrelated individuals required a substantially higher marker density and number of training records than when prediction individuals were offspring of training individuals. However, when the number of records was 2*Ne*L and the number of markers was 10*Ne*L, the breeding values of unrelated individuals could be predicted with accuracies of 0.88 - 0.93, where Ne is the effective population size and L the genome size in Morgan. Reducing this requirement to 1*Ne*L individuals, reduced prediction accuracies to 0.73-0.83. CONCLUSION: For livestock populations, 1NeL requires about approximately 30,000 training records, but this may be reduced if training and evaluation animals are related. A prediction equation is presented, that predicts accuracy when training and evaluation individuals are related. For humans, 1NeL requires approximately 350,000 individuals, which means that human disease risk prediction is possible only for diseases that are determined by a limited number of genes. Otherwise, genotyping and phenotypic recording need to become very common in the future.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Recent human effective population size estimated from linkage disequilibrium
Tenesa, A., Navarro, P., Hayes, B. J., Duffy, D. L., Clarke, G. M., Goddard, M. E., & Visscher, P. M. (2007) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.6023607 · Cited by 438
Cited by
Genomic selection: genome-wide prediction in plant improvement
Desta, Z. A., & Ortiz, R. (2014) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2014.05.006 · Cited by 688
Daetwyler, H. D., Calus, M. P. L., Pong-Wong, R., de los Campos, G., & Hickey, J. M. (2013) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.112.147983 · Cited by 455
Hickey, J. M., Dreisigacker, S., Crossa, J., Hearne, S., Babu, R., Prasanna, B. M., Grondona, M., Zambelli, A., Windhausen, V. S., Mathews, K., et al. (2014) · Crop Science · doi:10.2135/cropsci2013.03.0195 · Cited by 217
Metadata
- Authors
- Meuwissen, T. H.
- Venue
- Genetics Selection Evolution
- Published
- 2009-06-11
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 35-35
- ISSN
- 0999-193X (ISSN-L)
- 1297-9686
- OpenAlex
- W2171214867
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accuracy of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals predicted by dense SNP genotyping. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1297-9686-41-35
- The paper
- Meuwissen, T. H. (2009). Accuracy of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals predicted by dense SNP genotyping. Genetics Selection Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-41-35
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.