The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Genomic prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fifty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes1
Abstract
Genomic prediction involves characterization of chromosome fragments in a training population to predict merit. Confidence in the predictions relies on their evaluation in a validation population. Many commercial animals are multibreed (MB) or crossbred, but seedstock populations tend to be purebred (PB). Training in MB allows selection of PB for crossbred performance. Training in PB to predict MB performance quantifies the potential for across-breed genomic prediction. Efficiency of genomic selection was evaluated for a trait with heritability 0.5 simulated using actual SNP genotypes. The PB population had 1,086 Angus animals, and the MB population had 924 individuals from 8 sire breeds. Phenotypic values were simulated for scenarios including 50, 100, 250, or 500 additive QTL randomly selected from 50K SNP panels. Panels containing various numbers of SNP, including or excluding the QTL, were used in the analysis. A Bayesian model averaging method was used to simultaneously estimate the effects of all markers on the panels in MB (or PB) training populations. Estimated effects were utilized to predict genomic merit of animals in PB (or MB) validation populations. Correlations between predicted and simulated genomic merit in the validation population was used to reflect predictive ability. Panels that included QTL were able to account for 50% or more of the within-breed genetic variance when the trait was influenced by 50 QTL. The predictive power eroded as the number of QTL increased. Panels that composed the QTL and no other markers were able to account for 50% or more genetic variance even with 500 QTL. Panels that included genomic markers as well as QTL had less predictive power as the number of markers on the panel was increased. Panels that excluded the QTL and relied on markers in linkage disequilibrium (LD) to predict QTL effects performed more poorly than marker panels with QTL. Real-life situations with 50K panels that excluded the QTL could account for no more than 20% genetic variation for 50 QTL and less than 10% for 500 QTL. The difference between panels that included and excluded QTL indicates that the predictive ability of existing panels is limited by their LD. Training in PB to predict MB tended to be more predictive than training in MB to predict PB due to greater average levels of LD in PB than in MB populations. Improved across breed prediction of genomic merit will require panels with more than 50,000 markers.
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
Genomic Selection Accuracy for Grain Quality Traits in Biparental Wheat Populations
Heffner, E. L., Jannink, J., Iwata, H., Souza, E., & Sorrells, M. E. (2011) · Crop Science · doi:10.2135/cropsci2011.05.0253 · Cited by 294
Zhao, T., Zeng, J., & Cheng, H. (2022) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/iyac034 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Kizilkaya, K., Fernando, R. L., & Garrick, D. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Animal Science
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-02-01
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 544-551
- ISSN
- 0021-8812 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3163
- OpenAlex
- W2126946018
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Genomic prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fifty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2527/jas.2009-2064
- The paper
- Kizilkaya, K., Fernando, R. L., & Garrick, D. J. (2010). Genomic prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fifty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes1. Journal of Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2064
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.