Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 405

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genetic Architecture of Complex Traits and Accuracy of Genomic Prediction: Coat Colour, Milk-Fat Percentage, and Type in Holstein Cattle as Contrasting Model Traits

Open access
Hayes, Ben J., Pryce, Jennie, Chamberlain, Amanda J., Bowman, Phil J., Goddard, Mike E.·2010·PLoS Genetics

Abstract

Prediction of genetic merit using dense SNP genotypes can be used for estimation of breeding values for selection of livestock, crops, and forage species; for prediction of disease risk; and for forensics. The accuracy of these genomic predictions depends in part on the genetic architecture of the trait, in particular number of loci affecting the trait and distribution of their effects. Here we investigate the difference among three traits in distribution of effects and the consequences for the accuracy of genomic predictions. Proportion of black coat colour in Holstein cattle was used as one model complex trait. Three loci, KIT, MITF, and a locus on chromosome 8, together explain 24% of the variation of proportion of black. However, a surprisingly large number of loci of small effect are necessary to capture the remaining variation. A second trait, fat concentration in milk, had one locus of large effect and a host of loci with very small effects. Both these distributions of effects were in contrast to that for a third trait, an index of scores for a number of aspects of cow confirmation ("overall type"), which had only loci of small effect. The differences in distribution of effects among the three traits were quantified by estimating the distribution of variance explained by chromosome segments containing 50 SNPs. This approach was taken to account for the imperfect linkage disequilibrium between the SNPs and the QTL affecting the traits. We also show that the accuracy of predicting genetic values is higher for traits with a proportion of large effects (proportion black and fat percentage) than for a trait with no loci of large effect (overall type), provided the method of analysis takes advantage of the distribution of loci effects.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pgen.1001139

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 35 references

Cited by

See all 405

Metadata

Authors
Hayes, B. J., Pryce, J., Chamberlain, A. J., Bowman, P. J., & Goddard, M. E.
Venue
PLoS Genetics
Published
2010-09-23
Volume
6
Issue
9
Pages
e1001139
ISSN
  • 1553-7390 (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7404
OpenAlex
W2077946779
Cited by
405
References
35
FWCI
16.77
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: Genetic Architecture of Complex Traits and Accuracy of Genomic Prediction: Coat Colour, Milk-Fat Percentage, and Type in Holstein Cattle as Contrasting Model Traits. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pgen.1001139
The paper
Hayes, B. J., Pryce, J., Chamberlain, A. J., Bowman, P. J., & Goddard, M. E. (2010). Genetic Architecture of Complex Traits and Accuracy of Genomic Prediction: Coat Colour, Milk-Fat Percentage, and Type in Holstein Cattle as Contrasting Model Traits. PLoS Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1001139

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.