↓ Skip to main content

Genomic evaluation for a three-way crossbreeding system considering breed-of-origin of alleles

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics Selection Evolution, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
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.
Title
Genomic evaluation for a three-way crossbreeding system considering breed-of-origin of alleles
Published in
Genetics Selection Evolution, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12711-017-0350-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia A. Sevillano, Jeremie Vandenplas, John W. M. Bastiaansen, Rob Bergsma, Mario P. L. Calus

Abstract

Genomic prediction of purebred animals for crossbred performance can be based on a model that estimates effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in purebreds on crossbred performance. For crossbred performance, SNP effects might be breed-specific due to differences between breeds in allele frequencies and linkage disequilibrium patterns between SNPs and quantitative trait loci. Accurately tracing the breed-of-origin of alleles (BOA) in three-way crosses is possible with a recently developed procedure called BOA. A model that accounts for breed-specific SNP effects (BOA model), has never been tested empirically on a three-way crossbreeding scheme. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to evaluate the estimates of variance components and the predictive accuracy of the BOA model compared to models in which SNP effects for crossbred performance were assumed to be the same across breeds, using either breed-specific allele frequencies ([Formula: see text] model) or allele frequencies averaged across breeds ([Formula: see text] model). In this study, we used data from purebred and three-way crossbred pigs on average daily gain (ADG), back fat thickness (BF), and loin depth (LD). Estimates of variance components for crossbred performance from the BOA model were mostly similar to estimates from models [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. Heritabilities for crossbred performance ranged from 0.24 to 0.46 between traits. Genetic correlations between purebred and crossbred performance ([Formula: see text]) across breeds ranged from 0.30 to 0.62 for ADG and from 0.53 to 0.74 for BF and LD. For ADG, prediction accuracies of the BOA model were higher than those of the [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] models, with significantly higher accuracies only for one maternal breed. For BF and LD, prediction accuracies of models [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] were higher than those of the BOA model, with no significant differences. Across all traits, models [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] yielded similar predictions. The BOA model yielded a higher prediction accuracy for ADG in one maternal breed, which had the lowest [Formula: see text] (0.30). Using the BOA model was especially relevant for traits with a low [Formula: see text]. In all other cases, the use of crossbred information in models [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], does not jeopardize predictions and these models are more easily implemented than the BOA model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 28%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Researcher 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#5,167,753
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#123
of 821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,013
of 338,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#5
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 821 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 338,323 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 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.