MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mate selection strategies to exploit across‐ and within‐breed dominance variation

2000· article· en· W1977692059 on OpenAlex
Ben J. Hayes, Stephen P. Miller

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Breeding and Genetics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBreedBiologySelection (genetic algorithm)Truncation selectionHeterosisDominance (genetics)StatisticsGenetic variationMathematicsEcologyGeneticsAgronomyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary In multi‐breed livestock populations, dominance variance is found both between and within breeds for many economically important traits. Mate selection strategies were developed to exploit both types of dominance variation simultaneously, with the aim of maximizing genetic merit of progeny. The extended super‐breed model, in which breeds are viewed as groups of related and inbred animals within a ‘super‐breed’, was used to predict individual additive and dominance effects for use in mate selection. Performance of mate selection was assessed under a range of relative values of additive and dominance variances for one generation of breeding. Mate selection on total progeny merit, including additive effects, individual dominance effects, and value of heterosis, was the optimal breeding strategy at all values of (co)variance components, with improvements in total progeny performance of up to 12.5 % over truncation selection followed by random mating when dominance variance was large relative to total genetic variance. Improvement in progeny merit from mate selection, relative to truncation selection, followed by random mating or truncation selection, followed by mate allocation, was particularly great (up to 53 %) when there was considerable heterosis. Improvements were small if dominance variance was small relative to total genetic variance, and heterosis was low. If the target population is large, full mate selection on total progeny merit is computationally demanding, and unlikely to be practical. Alternative, less computationally demanding strategies made nearly optimal selection and mating decisions at some parameter estimates. Integrating multi‐breed genetic evaluation, using a superbreed model, with mate selection provides a powerful framework for the design of breeding programmes which exploit available sources of genetic merit.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it