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

How pedigree errors affect genetic evaluations and validation statistics.

Journal of dairy science - 1 Jun 2024

Pimentel E C G, Edel C, Emmerling R, Götz K-U

Abstract excerpt

Pedigrees used in genetic evaluations contain errors. Because of such errors, assumptions regarding the relatedness among individuals in genetic evaluation models are wrong. Consequences of that have been investigated in earlier studies focusing on models that did not account for genomic information yet. The objective of this work was to investigate the effects of pedigree errors on the results from genetic...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

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

Share to Breeding
Share to Cattle
Share to Genotype

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Models, Genetic

Share to Pedigree

Share to Phenotype

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 38135046
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2023-24070

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

How pedigree errors affect genetic evaluations and validation statistics.PMID 38135046Read ↗

Correcting for base-population differences and unknown parent groups in single-step genomic predictions of Norwegian Red cattle.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Comparison of models for missing pedigree in single-step genomic prediction.Semantic proximity Read ↗

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

On the ability of the LR method to detect bias when there is pedigree misspecification and lack of connectedness.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Reliability of pedigree-based and genomic evaluations in selected populations.Semantic proximity Read ↗

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

Updating the reference population to achieve constant genomic prediction reliability across generations.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Validation with single-step SNPBLUP shows that evaluations can continue using a single mean of genotyped individuals, even with multiple breeds.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Invited review: Unknown-parent groups and metafounders in single-step genomic BLUP.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Short communication: The role of genotypes from animals without phenotypes in single-step genomic evaluations.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Modeling missing pedigree with metafounders and validating single-step genomic predictions in a small dairy cattle population with a great influence of foreign genetics.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Crossbreed evaluations in single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor using adjusted realized relationship matrices.Semantic proximity Read ↗

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