↓ Skip to main content

Effects of number of training generations on genomic prediction for various traits in a layer chicken population

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics Selection Evolution, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Effects of number of training generations on genomic prediction for various traits in a layer chicken population
Published in
Genetics Selection Evolution, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12711-016-0198-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ziqing Weng, Anna Wolc, Xia Shen, Rohan L. Fernando, Jack C. M. Dekkers, Jesus Arango, Petek Settar, Janet E. Fulton, Neil P. O’Sullivan, Dorian J. Garrick

Abstract

Genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) based on single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes are widely used in animal improvement programs. It is typically assumed that the larger the number of animals is in the training set, the higher is the prediction accuracy of GEBV. The aim of this study was to quantify genomic prediction accuracy depending on the number of ancestral generations included in the training set, and to determine the optimal number of training generations for different traits in an elite layer breeding line. Phenotypic records for 16 traits on 17,793 birds were used. All parents and some selection candidates from nine non-overlapping generations were genotyped for 23,098 segregating SNPs. An animal model with pedigree relationships (PBLUP) and the BayesB genomic prediction model were applied to predict EBV or GEBV at each validation generation (progeny of the most recent training generation) based on varying numbers of immediately preceding ancestral generations. Prediction accuracy of EBV or GEBV was assessed as the correlation between EBV and phenotypes adjusted for fixed effects, divided by the square root of trait heritability. The optimal number of training generations that resulted in the greatest prediction accuracy of GEBV was determined for each trait. The relationship between optimal number of training generations and heritability was investigated. On average, accuracies were higher with the BayesB model than with PBLUP. Prediction accuracies of GEBV increased as the number of closely-related ancestral generations included in the training set increased, but reached an asymptote or slightly decreased when distant ancestral generations were used in the training set. The optimal number of training generations was 4 or more for high heritability traits but less than that for low heritability traits. For less heritable traits, limiting the training datasets to individuals closely related to the validation population resulted in the best predictions. The effect of adding distant ancestral generations in the training set on prediction accuracy differed between traits and the optimal number of necessary training generations is associated with the heritability of traits.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Student > Master 7 15%
Other 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Mathematics 2 4%
Computer Science 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 8 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2016.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#523
of 822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,202
of 314,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#11
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 314,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.