MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An independent confirmation of a quantitative trait locus for milk yield and composition traits on bovine chromosome 26

2005· article· en· W2120028021 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zhihua Jiang, Sachinandan De, M.D. Garcia, Kirsten B. Griffin, Xiao‐Lin Wu, Xiao Qi, Jennifer J. Michal, B. S. Sharma, G.B. Jansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Breeding and Genetics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersWashington State University
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusBiologySireGeneticsPopulationDairy cattleLocus (genetics)TraitGeneAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several reports have demonstrated that bovine chromosome 26 (BTA26) harbours significant or suggestive quantitative trait loci (QTL) for milk production and composition traits in dairy cattle. Our previous study showed that a C/T substitution in the bovine TCF7L2 gene on BTA26 was significantly linked to QTL for protein yield (PY) in a Canadian dairy cattle population. Actually, this polymorphism was one of the markers derived from a genome-wide screening of QTL for milk PY using an amplified fragment length polymorphism technique combined with a DNA pooling strategy. In the present study, 990 Holstein bulls with complete genotype and phenotype data from 14 sire families were analysed to confirm, if the QTL effects exist in other populations. Statistical analysis revealed that this marker was significantly associated with PY, protein percentage, milk yield and fat yield (FY) (p < 0.001) in the US Holstein population. These results indicate that this QTL region has a pleiotrophic effecton different milk traits and is portable in different populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Breeding and GeneticsSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207