↓ Skip to main content

Genomic prediction of disease occurrence using producer-recorded health data: a comparison of methods

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics Selection Evolution, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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 prediction of disease occurrence using producer-recorded health data: a comparison of methods
Published in
Genetics Selection Evolution, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12711-015-0093-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristen L Parker Gaddis, Francesco Tiezzi, John B Cole, John S Clay, Christian Maltecca

Abstract

Genetic selection has been successful in achieving increased production in dairy cattle; however, corresponding declines in fitness traits have been documented. Selection for fitness traits is more difficult, since they have low heritabilities and are influenced by various non-genetic factors. The objective of this paper was to investigate the predictive ability of two-stage and single-step genomic selection methods applied to health data collected from on-farm computer systems in the U.S. Implementation of single-trait and two-trait sire models was investigated using BayesA and single-step methods for mastitis and somatic cell score. Variance components were estimated. The complete dataset was divided into training and validation sets to perform model comparison. Estimated sire breeding values were used to estimate the number of daughters expected to develop mastitis. Predictive ability of each model was assessed by the sum of χ (2) values that compared predicted and observed numbers of daughters with mastitis and the proportion of wrong predictions. According to the model applied, estimated heritabilities of liability to mastitis ranged from 0.05 (S D=0.02) to 0.11 (S D=0.03) and estimated heritabilities of somatic cell score ranged from 0.08 (S D=0.01) to 0.18 (S D=0.03). Posterior mean of genetic correlation between mastitis and somatic cell score was equal to 0.63 (S D=0.17). The single-step method had the best predictive ability. Conversely, the smallest number of wrong predictions was obtained with the univariate BayesA model. The best model fit was found for single-step and pedigree-based models. Bivariate single-step analysis had a better predictive ability than bivariate BayesA; however, the latter led to the smallest number of wrong predictions. Genomic data improved our ability to predict animal breeding values. Performance of genomic selection methods depends on a multitude of factors. Heritability of traits and reliability of genotyped individuals has a large impact on the performance of genomic evaluation methods. Given the current characteristics of producer-recorded health data, single-step methods have several advantages compared to two-step methods.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 42%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 7 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 February 2017.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#303
of 822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,389
of 279,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#3
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 822 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 279,161 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.