↓ Skip to main content

Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive-dominance genomic models

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomic Data, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive-dominance genomic models
Published in
BMC Genomic Data, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12863-015-0264-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camila Ferreira Azevedo, Marcos Deon Vilela de Resende, Fabyano Fonseca e Silva, José Marcelo Soriano Viana, Magno Sávio Ferreira Valente, Márcio Fernando Ribeiro Resende, Patricio Muñoz

Abstract

A complete approach for genome-wide selection (GWS) involves reliable statistical genetics models and methods. Reports on this topic are common for additive genetic models but not for additive-dominance models. The objective of this paper was (i) to compare the performance of 10 additive-dominance predictive models (including current models and proposed modifications), fitted using Bayesian, Lasso and Ridge regression approaches; and (ii) to decompose genomic heritability and accuracy in terms of three quantitative genetic information sources, namely, linkage disequilibrium (LD), co-segregation (CS) and pedigree relationships or family structure (PR). The simulation study considered two broad sense heritability levels (0.30 and 0.50, associated with narrow sense heritabilities of 0.20 and 0.35, respectively) and two genetic architectures for traits (the first consisting of small gene effects and the second consisting of a mixed inheritance model with five major genes). G-REML/G-BLUP and a modified Bayesian/Lasso (called BayesA*B* or t-BLASSO) method performed best in the prediction of genomic breeding as well as the total genotypic values of individuals in all four scenarios (two heritabilities x two genetic architectures). The BayesA*B*-type method showed a better ability to recover the dominance variance/additive variance ratio. Decomposition of genomic heritability and accuracy revealed the following descending importance order of information: LD, CS and PR not captured by markers, the last two being very close. Amongst the 10 models/methods evaluated, the G-BLUP, BAYESA*B* (-2,8) and BAYESA*B* (4,6) methods presented the best results and were found to be adequate for accurately predicting genomic breeding and total genotypic values as well as for estimating additive and dominance in additive-dominance genomic models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 4 5%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 83 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Researcher 16 18%
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 11%
Computer Science 2 2%
Mathematics 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 22 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 August 2015.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomic Data
#786
of 1,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,678
of 279,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomic Data
#21
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,204 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 279,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.