MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477758523 · doi:10.5377/ceiba.v54i1.2776

Looking Ahead: Applying new Genomic Technologies to Accelerate Genetic Improvement in Beef Cattle

2016· article· en· W2477758523 on OpenAlexaff
Ángela Cánovas

Bibliographic record

VenueCeiba · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyContext (archaeology)BiotechnologySelection (genetic algorithm)Beef cattleGenomicsIdentification (biology)LivestockGenomic selectionMolecular breedingComputational biologyMetagenomicsDairy cattleGeneGeneticsGenomeComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, producers have combined the use of phenotypic appraisal and the estimation of breeding values (PTA or EPD) to make genetic selection decisions in beef and dairy cattle that have resulted in a steady genetic gain of 2% per year. However, the most extensive application of genomics has occurred in dairy with the estimation of molecular breeding values that has increased selection efficiency to a much higher order of magnitude. Despite a growing molecular and physiological understanding of complex traits, little is known about the genes determining the traits and their precise function, and a significant unexplained source of variation of phenotypes remains in livestock. Within this context, a more complete understanding of the genes and regulatory pathways and networks involved in economically important traits (i.e. feed efficiency and methane emissions, meat quality and carcass traits) in beef cattle will provide knowledge to help improve genetic selection and reproductive management. Therefore, high throughput -OMICS technology (i.e., transcriptomics, metagenomics, metabolomics, as well as epigenetics and gene networks amongst several others), will complement these tools and further advance identification of functional genes within a systems biology approach.

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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCeibaSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207