Bayesian Segregation Analysis of Somatic Cell Scores of Ontario Holstein Cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bayesian segregation analysis using a Gibbs sampling approach was applied to four sets of simulated data and one set of field data to detect evidence of major genes affecting the evaluated trait. The substitution effect of a major gene and its allelic frequency were estimated for each set of data. For two datasets simulated with a model with no major gene effect, the resulting estimates of polygenic variance and heritability agreed with the simulated values and tests for the presence of a major gene were not significant. Analyses of two sets of data simulated with a major gene produced posterior distributions that gave significant evidence of major gene effects but underestimated the substitution values of the major gene. The segregation analysis of field data suggested that a major gene significantly affected somatic cell score (SCS) in the population of Ontario Holstein cattle. The estimated heritability of SCS was approximately 0.16. The major gene variance accounted for about 17% of the total genetic variance and the point estimate of the frequency of the allele having a positive effect on SCS was 0.30. However, the precision of these estimates is questionable based on the simulation results. The effect of the major gene may be underestimated.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".