The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Performance of Genomic Selection in Mice
Open accessAbstract
Selection plans in plant and animal breeding are driven by genetic evaluation. Recent developments suggest using massive genetic marker information, known as “genomic selection.” There is little evidence of its performance, though. We empirically compared three strategies for selection: (1) use of pedigree and phenotypic information, (2) use of genomewide markers and phenotypic information, and (3) the combination of both. We analyzed four traits from a heterogeneous mouse population (http://gscan.well.ox.ac.uk/), including 1884 individuals and 10,946 SNP markers. We used linear mixed models, using extensions of association analysis. Cross-validation techniques were used, providing assumption-free estimates of predictive ability. Sampling of validation and training data sets was carried out across and within families, which allows comparing across- and within-family information. Use of genomewide genetic markers increased predictive ability up to 0.22 across families and up to 0.03 within families. The latter is not statistically significant. These values are roughly comparable to increases of up to 0.57 (across family) and 0.14 (within family) in accuracy of prediction of genetic value. In this data set, within-family information was more accurate than across-family information, and populational linkage disequilibrium was not a completely accurate source of information for genetic evaluation. This fact questions some applications of genomic selection.
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
Cited by
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
Technow, F., Schrag, T. A., Schipprack, W., Bauer, E., Simianer, H., & Melchinger, A. E. (2014) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.114.165860 · Cited by 237
Technow, F., Bürger, A., & Melchinger, A. E. (2013) · G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics · doi:10.1534/g3.112.004630 · Cited by 147
Evaluation of genome-wide selection efficiency in maize nested association mapping populations
Guo, Z., Tucker, D. M., Lu, J., Kishore, V., & Gay, G. (2012) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/s00122-011-1702-9 · Cited by 127
Metadata
- Authors
- Legarra, A., Robert-Granié, C., Manfredi, E., & Elsen, J.-M.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-09-01
- Volume
- 180
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 611-618
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2109781146
- Cited by
- 432
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Performance of Genomic Selection in Mice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1534/genetics.108.088575
- The paper
- Legarra, A., Robert-Granié, C., Manfredi, E., & Elsen, J.-M. (2008). Performance of Genomic Selection in Mice. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.108.088575
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.