You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Accuracy of estimated breeding values with genomic information on males, females, or both: an example on broiler chicken
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetics Selection Evolution, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12711-015-0137-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniela A. L. Lourenco, Breno O. Fragomeni, Shogo Tsuruta, Ignacio Aguilar, Birgit Zumbach, Rachel J. Hawken, Andres Legarra, Ignacy Misztal |
| Abstract |
As more and more genotypes become available, accuracy of genomic evaluations can potentially increase. However, the impact of genotype data on accuracy depends on the structure of the genotyped cohort. For populations such as dairy cattle, the greatest benefit has come from genotyping sires with high accuracy, whereas the benefit due to adding genotypes from cows was smaller. In broiler chicken breeding programs, males have less progeny than dairy bulls, females have more progeny than dairy cows, and most production traits are recorded for both sexes. Consequently, genotyping both sexes in broiler chickens may be more advantageous than in dairy cattle. We studied the contribution of genotypes from males and females using a real dataset with genotypes on 15 723 broiler chickens. Genomic evaluations used three training sets that included only males (4648), only females (8100), and both sexes (12 748). Realized accuracies of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were used to evaluate the benefit of including genotypes for different training populations on genomic predictions of young genotyped chickens. Using genotypes on males, the average increase in accuracy of GEBV over pedigree-based EBV for males and females was 12 and 1 percentage points, respectively. Using female genotypes, this increase was 1 and 18 percentage points, respectively. Using genotypes of both sexes increased accuracies by 19 points for males and 20 points for females. For two traits with similar heritabilities and amounts of information, realized accuracies from cross-validation were lower for the trait that was under strong selection. Overall, genotyping males and females improves predictions of all young genotyped chickens, regardless of sex. Therefore, when males and females both contribute to genetic progress of the population, genotyping both sexes may be the best option. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Poland | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 18% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 49 | 60% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 22 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,597,909
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#196
of 822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,581
of 277,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 822 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.