1995
DOI: 10.2527/1995.7351264x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of selective reporting on estimates of weaning weight parameters in beef cattle

Abstract: The effect of selective reporting on estimates of weaning weight parameters in beef cattle was evaluated by comparing REML estimates from unaltered and altered simulated data. Selective reporting reduced estimates of weaning weight direct (WWD), maternal milk (MAT), and error variances. However, heritability estimates were not greatly affected because the reductions in variance estimates were relatively proportionate. When the true value for the direct-maternal (DM) correlation was zero or negative, selective … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mean estimates in the literature, as reported in reviews by Meyer (1992), Mohiuddin (1993), and Koots et al (1994b), are solidly negative. Negative correlations between direct and maternal effects may be due not only to genetic antagonism but also to negative environmental dam-offspring covariances (Baker 1980), sire-by-year variation that is unaccounted for (Robinson 1994), or selective reporting of data (Mallinckrodt et al 1995). Such sources of error are more probable in field data than controlled experiments like this study.…”
Section: Maternal Componentsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Mean estimates in the literature, as reported in reviews by Meyer (1992), Mohiuddin (1993), and Koots et al (1994b), are solidly negative. Negative correlations between direct and maternal effects may be due not only to genetic antagonism but also to negative environmental dam-offspring covariances (Baker 1980), sire-by-year variation that is unaccounted for (Robinson 1994), or selective reporting of data (Mallinckrodt et al 1995). Such sources of error are more probable in field data than controlled experiments like this study.…”
Section: Maternal Componentsmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…For CE no comparable estimates were found in the literature. These large negative correlations reported in numerous studies (Baker, 1980;Cantet et al, 1988;Meyer, 1992a) between direct and maternal effects, may according to Meyer (1992b), be due to management practices or environmentally induced negative dam-offspring covariances or selective reporting of data (Mallinckrodt et al, 1995) or sire x year interactions (Robinson, 1996) and do not always reflect true adverse genetic relationships between growth and maternal performance. The latter may probably be a reason for the high covariance between direct and maternal effects for CE related to early calving of heifers.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As only one tail of the distribution was included, we suspect that our estimates underestimate the amount of genetic variance in the whole population (e.g. Mallinckrodt et al. 1995).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%