1975
DOI: 10.2307/2529430
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Best Linear Unbiased Estimation and Prediction under a Selection Model

Abstract: Mixed linear models are assumed in most animal breeding applications. Convenient methods for computing BLUE of the estimable linear functions of the fixed elements of the model and for computing best linear unbiased predictions of the random elements of the model have been available. Most data available to animal breeders, however, do not meet the usual requirements of random sampling, the problem being that the data arise either from selection experiments or from breeders' herds which are undergoing selection… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

5
1,359
1
82

Year Published

1998
1998
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,844 publications
(1,447 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
5
1,359
1
82
Order By: Relevance
“…11,12 Originally applied to animal and plant breeding, 13,14 LMMs have become a powerful method to estimate SNP-based heritability using GWAS data. 15,16 By assuming a common distribution that describes the allelic effects at all SNPs and focusing on the aggregated genetic effects rather than individual genetic effects, LMMs and BLUP are particularly attractive for modeling polygenic architecture.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,12 Originally applied to animal and plant breeding, 13,14 LMMs have become a powerful method to estimate SNP-based heritability using GWAS data. 15,16 By assuming a common distribution that describes the allelic effects at all SNPs and focusing on the aggregated genetic effects rather than individual genetic effects, LMMs and BLUP are particularly attractive for modeling polygenic architecture.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…contributions or proportions of total offspring left by each candidate), g the vector of BLUP-EBVs (or the best estimate available of breeding values) of the candidates, A is the additive genetic relationship matrix (e.g. Henderson, 1975), C 5 F 1 (12F ) DF with F being the current level of inbreeding and DF being the desired rate of inbreeding, Q is a known incidence matrix for sex and 1 is a vector of ones of order 2. The first inequality ensures that the constraint on DF is met (note that, with fully random union of gametes, 1 2 c 0 Ac is the Genetic management of populations inbreeding coefficient of the next generation), whereas the second inequality ensures that half of the contributions come from males and half from females.…”
Section: Selection With Optimal Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When the offspring has received a recombinant marker haplotype a new gametic QTL effect was defined as the average of both gametes of the parent animal. Treating these two gametes as parents of the new gamete allows to set up a pedigree of gametic effects and to compute the conditional gametic relationship matrix and its inverse simply by applying the Henderson rules [7,8]. The condensing algorithm will, of course, lead to identical results, if desired: sire-and dam-blocks of progeny with non-recombinant parental haplotypes have to carry zeros and ones only, and in the recombinant case the corresponding sire-and dam-blocks are assembled by fifty-percent transition probabilities as in the case without markers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%