Persistency of accuracy of genomic breeding values for different simulated pig breeding programs in developing countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic improvement of pigs in tropical developing countries has focused on imported exotic populations which have been subjected to intensive selection with attendant high population-wide linkage disequilibrium (LD). Presently, indigenous pig population with limited selection and low LD are being considered for improvement. Given that the infrastructure for genetic improvement using the conventional BLUP selection methods are lacking, a genome-wide selection (GS) program was proposed for developing countries. A simulation study was conducted to evaluate the option of using 60 K SNP panel and observed amount of LD in the exotic and indigenous pig populations. Several scenarios were evaluated including different size and structure of training and validation populations, different selection methods and long-term accuracy of GS in different population/breeding structures and traits. The training set included previously selected exotic population, unselected indigenous population and their crossbreds. Traits studied included number born alive (NBA), average daily gain (ADG) and back fat thickness (BFT). The ridge regression method was used to train the prediction model. The results showed that accuracies of genomic breeding values (GBVs) in the range of 0.30 (NBA) to 0.86 (BFT) in the validation population are expected if high density marker panels are utilized. The GS method improved accuracy of breeding values better than pedigree-based approach for traits with low heritability and in young animals with no performance data. Crossbred training population performed better than purebreds when validation was in populations with similar or a different structure as in the training set. Genome-wide selection holds promise for genetic improvement of pigs in the tropics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".