Genomic prediction of breed composition and heterosis effects in Angus, Charolais and Hereford crosses using 50K genotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the feasibility and accuracy of using Illumina BovineSNP50 genotypes to estimate individual cattle breed composition and heterosis relative to estimate from pedigree. First, pedigree was used to compute breed fractions for 1124 crossbred cattle. Given the breed composition of sires and dams, retained heterosis and retained heterozygosity were computed for all individuals. Second, all animals’ genotypes were used to compute individual’s genomic breed fractions by applying a cross-validation method. Average genome-wide heterozygosity and retained heterozygosity based on genomic breed fraction were computed. Lastly, accuracies of breed composition, retained heterozygosity and retained heterosis were assessed as Pearson’s correlation between pedigree- and genome-based predictions. The average breed compositions observed were 0.52 Angus, 0.23 Charolais, and 0.25 Hereford for pedigree-based prediction and 0.46, 0.26, and 0.28 for genome-based prediction, respectively. Correlations of predicted breed composition ranged from 0.94 to 0.96. Genome-based retained heterozygosity and retained heterosis from pedigree were also highly correlated (0.96). A positive association of nonadditive genetic effects was observed for growth traits reflecting the importance of heterosis for these traits. Genomic prediction can aid analyses that depend on knowledge of breed composition and serve as a reliable method to predict heterosis to improve the efficiency of commercial crossbreeding schemes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".