MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904616301 · doi:10.1093/jas/sky404.232

283 Validation of Quantitative Trait Loci Associated with Grazing Distribution Traits in Beef Cattle Using Bayes C.

2018· article· en· W2904616301 on OpenAlexaff
Courtney F. Pierce, Derek W. Bailey, Juan F. Medrano, Ángela Cánovas, Scott E Speidel, S.J. Coleman, R. M. Enns, Mark Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrazingQuantitative trait locusSNPBeef cattleBiologyStatisticsBayes' theoremGenetic associationMathematicsAnimal scienceBayesian probabilityGeneticsAgronomySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concentrated grazing may destroy wildlife habitat, reduce forage harvest, and degrade riparian areas; therefore, it is necessary to develop tools to improve grazing distribution for extensive pastures in beef production systems. A previous genome-wide association study identified 5 QTL on BTA 4, 12, 17, and 29 that were associated with grazing distribution indices (rolling and rough). The objective of this study was to validate these QTL using additional association analyses with a Bayesian approach. Global positioning system (GPS) technology was used to collect grazing distribution phenotypes from 80 beef cows on 5 ranches in New Mexico, Montana, and Arizona. Percent slope, elevation, and distance from water were calculated using GPS coordinates and incorporated into two terrain-use indices (rough and rolling). Cows were genotyped with 777,962 SNP and after applying standard SNP quality filters, 733,713 SNP from 75 cows were available for analysis. A single chromosome (BTA 4, 12, 17, 29) association analysis was performed for both the rough and rolling indices using Bayes C (within the BOLT software package. The posterior inclusion probability (PIP) for each SNP was estimated. The association between rs109619368 on BTA 17 and the rough index was confirmed (PIP = 2.1%); however, the QTL on BTA 4, 12, and 29 were not verified. To further investigate this, 50 SNP spanning 0.2 MB on BTA 29 were analyzed with the rolling index. Two SNP were confirmed in this analysis: rs42161939 (PIP = 54.9%) and rs43744222 (PIP = 21.6%). The Bayesian approach applied in this study, in which markers are simultaneously fit in the model, revealed 3 QTL concordant with previous analyses which used a single-marker regression approach. These results suggest that grazing distribution traits are under genetic control; however, a greater number of observations are needed to confirm the QTL associated with grazing distribution (SW15-015).

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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