Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Factors affecting GEBV accuracy with single-step Bayesian models.

Heredity - 1 Jan 2018

Zhou Lei, Mrode Raphael, Zhang Shengli, Zhang Qin, Li Bugao, Liu Jian-Feng

Abstract excerpt

A single-step approach to obtain genomic prediction was first proposed in 2009. Many studies have investigated the components of GEBV accuracy in genomic selection. However, it is still unclear how the population structure and the relationships between training and validation populations influence GEBV accuracy in terms of single-step analysis. Here, we explored the components of GEBV accuracy in single-step...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Bayes Theorem
Share to Breeding
Share to Genomics

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Genotype

Share to Linkage Disequilibrium

Share to Models, Genetic

Share to Phenotype

Share to Quantitative Trait Loci

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 29167557
DOI: 10.1038/s41437-017-0010-9
PMCID: PMC5837114

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 7 Sept 2026. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-07.1.

Source receipt: pubmed, retrieved 7 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Factors affecting GEBV accuracy with single-step Bayesian models.PMID 29167557Read ↗

Single-Step Genomic Evaluations from Theory to Practice: Using SNP Chips and Sequence Data in BLUPF90.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The prediction accuracies of linear-type traits in Czech Holstein cattle when using ssGBLUP or wssGBLUP.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of genomic predictions for lowly heritable traits using multi-step and single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor in Holstein cattle.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Experiences with a single-step genome evaluation.Semantic proximity Read ↗

A computationally efficient method for approximating reliabilities in large-scale single-step genomic prediction.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of genomic and traditional BLUP-estimated breeding value accuracy and selection response under alternative trait and genomic parameters.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of different validation methods for single-step genomic evaluations based on a simulated cattle population.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Genomic prediction of breeding values using previously estimated SNP variances.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Bias in genomic predictions for populations under selection.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Breeding value reliabilities for multiple-trait single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Short communication: Genomic prediction using different single-step methods in the Finnish red dairy cattle population.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Technical note: Automatic scaling in single-step genomic BLUP.Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.