A COMPARISON OF THE SENSITIVITY OF THE BAYESC AND GENOMIC BEST LINEAR UNBIASED PREDICTION (GBLUP) METHODS OF ESTIMATING GENOMIC BREEDING VALUES UNDER DIFFERENT QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS (QTL) MODEL ASSUMPTIONS

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

SHIRALI M.; MIRAEI ASHTIANI S.R.; PAKDEL A.; HALEY C.; NAVARRO P.; PONG WONG R.

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: IRANIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL SCIENCE Year:2015 | Volume:5 | Issue:1 Page(s): 41-46

Download Full-Text

View:

267

Download:

175

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

A COMPARISON OF THE SENSITIVITY OF THE BAYESC AND GENOMIC BEST LINEAR UNBIASED PREDICTION (GBLUP) METHODS OF ESTIMATING GENOMIC BREEDING VALUES UNDER DIFFERENT QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS (QTL) MODEL ASSUMPTIONS

Author(s)

Keywords

BAYESC

BREEDING VALUE

GBLUP

NUMBER OF QTL

QTL EFFECT DISTRIBUTION

Abstract

using two diverse approaches, GBLUP and BAYESC, using simulated data under different quantitative trait locus (QTL) effect distributions. Data were simulated with three different distributions for the QTL effect which were uniform, normal and gamma (1.66, 0.4). The NUMBER OF QTL was assumed to be either 5, 10 or 20. In total, 9 different scenarios were generated to compare the markers estimated BREEDING VALUEs obtained from these scenarios using t-tests. In comparisons between GBLUP and BAYESC within different scenarios for a trait of interest, the genomic estimated BREEDING VALUEs produced and the true BREEDING VALUEs in a training set were highly correlated (r>0.80), despite diverse assumptions and distributions. BAYESC produced more accurate estimations than GBLUP in most simulated traits. In all scenarios, GBLUP had a consistently high accuracy independent of different distributions of QTL effects and at all numbers of QTL. BAYESC produced estimates with higher accuracies in traits influenced by a low NUMBER OF QTL and with gamma QTL effects distribution. In conclusion, GBLUP and BAYESC had persistent high accuracies in all scenarios, al-though BAYESC performed better in traits with low numbers of QTL and a Gamma effect distribution.

Cites

No record.

References

Cite

APA: Copy

SHIRALI, M., MIRAEI ASHTIANI, S.R., PAKDEL, A., HALEY, C., NAVARRO, P., & PONG WONG, R.. (2015). A COMPARISON OF THE SENSITIVITY OF THE BAYESC AND GENOMIC BEST LINEAR UNBIASED PREDICTION (GBLUP) METHODS OF ESTIMATING GENOMIC BREEDING VALUES UNDER DIFFERENT QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS (QTL) MODEL ASSUMPTIONS. IRANIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL SCIENCE, 5(1), 41-46. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/657215/en

Vancouver: Copy

SHIRALI M., MIRAEI ASHTIANI S.R., PAKDEL A., HALEY C., NAVARRO P., PONG WONG R.. A COMPARISON OF THE SENSITIVITY OF THE BAYESC AND GENOMIC BEST LINEAR UNBIASED PREDICTION (GBLUP) METHODS OF ESTIMATING GENOMIC BREEDING VALUES UNDER DIFFERENT QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS (QTL) MODEL ASSUMPTIONS. IRANIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL SCIENCE[Internet]. 2015;5(1):41-46. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/657215/en

IEEE: Copy

M. SHIRALI, S.R. MIRAEI ASHTIANI, A. PAKDEL, C. HALEY, P. NAVARRO, and R. PONG WONG, “A COMPARISON OF THE SENSITIVITY OF THE BAYESC AND GENOMIC BEST LINEAR UNBIASED PREDICTION (GBLUP) METHODS OF ESTIMATING GENOMIC BREEDING VALUES UNDER DIFFERENT QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS (QTL) MODEL ASSUMPTIONS,” IRANIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL SCIENCE, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 41–46, 2015, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/657215/en

Related Journal Papers

No record.

Related Seminar Papers

No record.

Related Plans

No record.

Recommended Workshops