Application of single-step genomic evaluation using multiple-trait random regression test-day models in dairy cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Test-day traits are important for genetic evaluation in dairy cattle and are better modeled by multiple-trait random regression models (RRM). The reliability and bias of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) predicted using multiple-trait RRM via single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) were investigated in the 3 major dairy cattle breeds in Canada (i.e., Ayrshire, Holstein, and Jersey). Individual additive genomic random regression coefficients for the test-day traits were predicted using 2 multiple-trait RRM: (1) one for milk, fat, and protein yields in the first, second, and third lactations, and (2) one for somatic cell score in the first, second, and third lactations. The predicted coefficients were used to derive GEBV for each lactation day and, subsequently, the daily GEBV were compared with traditional daily parent averages obtained by BLUP. To ensure compatibility between pedigree and genomic information for genotyped animals, different scaling factors for combining the inverse of genomic ( G −1 ) and pedigree ( A −1 22 ) relationship matrices were tested. In addition, the inclusion of only genotypes from animals with accurate breeding values (defined in preliminary analysis) was compared with the inclusion of all available genotypes in the analyzes. The ssGBLUP model led to considerably larger validation reliabilities than the BLUP model without genomic information. In general, scaling factors used to combine the G −1 and A −1 22 matrices had small influence on the validation reliabilities. However, a greater effect was observed in the inflation of GEBV. Less inflated GEBV were obtained by the ssGBLUP compared with the parent average from traditional BLUP when using optimal scaling factors to combine the G −1 and A −1 22 matrices. Similar results were observed when including either all available genotypes or only genotypes from animals with accurate breeding values. These findings indicate that ssGBLUP using multiple-trait RRM increases reliability and reduces bias of breeding values of young animals when compared with parent average from traditional BLUP in the Canadian Ayrshire, Holstein, and Jersey breeds.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".