Genomic data reveals large similarities among Canadian and French maternal pig lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combining reference populations from different countries and breeds could be an affordable way to enlarge the size of the reference populations for genomic prediction of breeding values. Therefore, the main objectives of this study were to assess the genetic diversity within and between two Canadian and French pig breeds (Landrace and Yorkshire) and the genomic relatedness among populations to evaluate the feasibility of an across-country reference population for pig genomic selection. A total of 14 756 pigs were genotyped on two single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chip panels (∼65K SNPs). A principal component analysis clearly discriminated Landrace and Yorkshire breeds, and also, but to a lesser extent, the Canadian and French purebred pigs of each breed. Linkage disequilibrium (LD) between adjacent SNPs was similar within Yorkshire populations. However, levels of LD were slightly different for Landrace populations. The consistency of gametic phase was very high between Yorkshire populations (0.96 at 0.05 Mb) and high for Landrace (0.88 at 0.05 Mb). Based on consistency of gametic phase, Canadian and French pig maternal lines are genetically close to each other. These results are promising, as they indicate that the accuracy of estimated genomic breeding values may increase by combining reference populations from the two countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".