2010
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008940
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the Genetic Interpretation of Disease Data

Abstract: BackgroundThe understanding of host genetic variation in disease resistance increasingly requires the use of field data to obtain sufficient numbers of phenotypes. We introduce concepts necessary for a genetic interpretation of field disease data, for diseases caused by microparasites such as bacteria or viruses. Our focus is on variance component estimation and we introduce epidemiological concepts to quantitative genetics.Methodology/Principal FindingsWe have derived simple deterministic formulae to predict … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

8
115
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 111 publications
(125 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
(23 reference statements)
8
115
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Deterministic predictions indicate a steady, almost linear, increase in GEBV accuracy if up to 20 000 extra records were added to this reference dataset . The rate of increase is conditional on the heritability of the trait and thus artificial challenges for the reference population may still be required to maximize exposure to infection and the potential heritability for WEC (Bishop & Woolliams, 2010), at least under Australian conditions. The next step is to increase the potential LD between markers and polymorphisms by increasing the density of SNP markers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Deterministic predictions indicate a steady, almost linear, increase in GEBV accuracy if up to 20 000 extra records were added to this reference dataset . The rate of increase is conditional on the heritability of the trait and thus artificial challenges for the reference population may still be required to maximize exposure to infection and the potential heritability for WEC (Bishop & Woolliams, 2010), at least under Australian conditions. The next step is to increase the potential LD between markers and polymorphisms by increasing the density of SNP markers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Livestock provide a suitable model for studying diseases (e.g. Lanzas et al, 2010), particularly when (subclinical) artificial infections are used to maximize the expression of genetic difference between individuals (Bishop & Woolliams, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, it may lower the biases due to incomplete exposure on estimable heritabilities (Bishop and Woolliams, 2010). Third, the model provides estimates of the probability of recovery (IMI1 to IMI2 5 a 10 ) and of new infection (IMI2 to IMI1 5 a 01 ) for each animal.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the problem of identifying infected cows based on their SCC is still not satisfactorily solved as individual SCC are not very sensitive in diagnosing mammary infection, either at the quarter or cow level (Sargeant et al, 2001;Djabri et al, 2002). This has a relevant impact on animal selection because imperfect accuracy in the diagnosis of infectious diseases results in a reduction of heritability estimates (Bishop and Woolliams, 2010). It is also a source of misclassification as uninfected animals may have high SCC (and vice versa).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…production and/or resistance to diseases in dairy cattle) (Lillehammer et al, 2011). This dual consequence facilitates the incorporation of disease-resistant loci information into livestock breeding (Bishop and Woolliams, 2010).Infectious diseases in livestock are likely to increase considerably production costs, as is the case for mastitis which may cost up to 2 billion €/year in Europe (http://www. sabre-eu.eu/).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%