↓ Skip to main content

Across population genomic prediction scenarios in which Bayesian variable selection outperforms GBLUP

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Across population genomic prediction scenarios in which Bayesian variable selection outperforms GBLUP
Published in
BMC Genomic Data, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12863-015-0305-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. van den Berg, M. P. L. Calus, T. H. E. Meuwissen, Y. C. J. Wientjes

Abstract

The use of information across populations is an attractive approach to increase the accuracy of genomic prediction for numerically small populations. However, accuracies of across population genomic prediction, in which reference and selection individuals are from different populations, are currently disappointing. It has been shown for within population genomic prediction that Bayesian variable selection models outperform GBLUP models when the number of QTL underlying the trait is low. Therefore, our objective was to identify across population genomic prediction scenarios in which Bayesian variable selection models outperform GBLUP in terms of prediction accuracy. In this study, high density genotype information of 1033 Holstein Friesian, 105 Groningen White Headed, and 147 Meuse-Rhine-Yssel cows were used. Phenotypes were simulated using two changing variables: (1) the number of QTL underlying the trait (3000, 300, 30, 3), and (2) the correlation between allele substitution effects of QTL across populations, i.e. the genetic correlation of the simulated trait between the populations (1.0, 0.8, 0.4). The accuracy obtained by the Bayesian variable selection model was depending on the number of QTL underlying the trait, with a higher accuracy when the number of QTL was lower. This trend was more pronounced for across population genomic prediction than for within population genomic prediction. It was shown that Bayesian variable selection models have an advantage over GBLUP when the number of QTL underlying the simulated trait was small. This advantage disappeared when the number of QTL underlying the simulated trait was large. The point where the accuracy of Bayesian variable selection and GBLUP became similar was approximately the point where the number of QTL was equal to the number of independent chromosome segments (M e ) across the populations. Bayesian variable selection models outperform GBLUP when the number of QTL underlying the trait is smaller than M e . Across populations, M e is considerably larger than within populations. So, it is more likely to find a number of QTL underlying a trait smaller than M e across populations than within population. Therefore Bayesian variable selection models can help to improve the accuracy of across population genomic prediction.

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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
France 1 2%
Unknown 51 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 22%
Researcher 12 22%
Student > Master 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Mathematics 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 13 24%
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 05 January 2016.
All research outputs
#14,783,193
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomic Data
#443
of 1,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,990
of 396,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomic Data
#8
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 396,487 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.