The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reliability of Genomic Predictions Across Multiple Populations
Open accessAbstract
Genomic prediction of future phenotypes or genetic merit using dense SNP genotypes can be used for prediction of disease risk, forensics, and genomic selection of livestock and domesticated plant species. The reliability of genomic predictions is their squared correlation with the true genetic merit and indicates the proportion of the genetic variance that is explained. As reliability relies heavily on the number of phenotypes, combining data sets from multiple populations may be attractive as a way to increase reliabilities, particularly when phenotypes are scarce. However, this strategy may also decrease reliabilities if the marker effects are very different between the populations. The effect of combining multiple populations on the reliability of genomic predictions was assessed for two simulated cattle populations, A and B, that had diverged for T = 6, 30, or 300 generations. The training set comprised phenotypes of 1000 individuals from population A and 0, 300, 600, or 1000 individuals from population B, while marker density and trait heritability were varied. Adding individuals from population B to the training set increased the reliability in population A by up to 0.12 when the marker density was high and T = 6, whereas it decreased the reliability in population A by up to 0.07 when the marker density was low and T = 300. Without individuals from population B in the training set, the reliability in population B was up to 0.77 lower than in population A, especially for large T. Adding individuals from population B to the training set increased the reliability in population B to close to the same level as in population A when the marker density was sufficiently high for the marker–QTL linkage disequilibrium to persist across populations. Our results suggest that the most accurate genomic predictions are achieved when phenotypes from all populations are combined in one training set, while for more diverged populations a higher marker density is required.
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
Linkage disequilibrium in finite populations
Hill, W. G., & Robertson, A. (1968) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf01245622 · Cited by 2,035
Use of Unlinked Genetic Markers to Detect Population Stratification in Association Studies
Pritchard, J. K., & Rosenberg, N. A. (1999) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/302449 · Cited by 1,198
Simultaneous Analysis of All SNPs in Genome-Wide and Re-Sequencing Association Studies
Hoggart, C. J., Whittaker, J. C., De Iorio, M., & Balding, D. J. (2008) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000130 · Cited by 321
Genetic and Haplotypic Structure in 14 European and African Cattle Breeds
Gautier, M., Faraut, T., Moazami-Goudarzi, K., Navratil, V., Foglio, M., Grohs, C., Boland, A., Garnier, J.-G., Boichard, D., Lathrop, G. M., et al. (2007) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.107.075804 · Cited by 158 · cited 2×
“For example, between Bos taurus cattle breeds, LD is persistent only for marker pairs that are ,10 kb from each other (Gautier et al. 2007; De Roos et al. 2008), and for commercial broiler chicken breeding lines, the correlation between lines of LD measure r ranged from 0.21 to 0.94 for markers…”
BackgroundInfluential
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
Polygenic adaptation: a unifying framework to understand positive selection
Barghi, N., Hermisson, J., & Schlötterer, C. (2020) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-020-0250-z · Cited by 425
Beyond Missing Heritability: Prediction of Complex Traits
Makowsky, R., Pajewski, N. M., Klimentidis, Y. C., Vazquez, A. I., Duarte, C. W., Allison, D. B., & de los Campos, G. (2011) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1002051 · Cited by 254
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
Metadata
- Authors
- de Roos, A. P. W., Hayes, B. J., & Goddard, M. E.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-12-01
- Volume
- 183
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1545-1553
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2030608564
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Reliability of Genomic Predictions Across Multiple Populations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1534/genetics.109.104935
- The paper
- de Roos, A. P. W., Hayes, B. J., & Goddard, M. E. (2009). Reliability of Genomic Predictions Across Multiple Populations. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.109.104935
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.