Use of a single-step approach for integrating foreign information into national genomic evaluation in Holstein cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of multi-trait across-country evaluation (MACE) and the exchange of genomic information among countries allows national breeding programs to combine foreign and national data to increase the size of the training populations and potentially increase accuracy of genomic prediction of breeding values. By including genotyped and nongenotyped animals simultaneously in the evaluation, the single-step genomic BLUP (GBLUP) approach has the potential to deliver more accurate and less biased genomic evaluations. A single-step genomic BLUP approach, which enables integration of data from MACE evaluations, can be used to obtain genomic predictions while avoiding double-counting of information. The objectives of this study were to apply a single-step approach that simultaneously includes domestic and MACE information for genomic evaluation of workability traits in Canadian Holstein cattle, and compare the results obtained with this methodology with those obtained using a multi-step approach (msGBLUP). By including MACE bulls in the training population, msGBLUP led to an increase in reliability of genomic predictions of 4.8 and 15.4% for milking temperament and milking speed, respectively, compared with a traditional evaluation using only pedigree and phenotypic information. Integration of MACE data through a single-step approach (ssGBLUP IM ) yielded the highest reliabilities compared with other considered methods. Integration of MACE data also helped reduce bias of genomic predictions. When using ssGBLUP IM , the bias of genomic predictions decreased by half compared with msGBLUP using domestic and MACE information. Therefore, the reliability and bias of genomic predictions for both traits improved substantially when a single-step approach was used for evaluation compared with a multi-step approach. The use of a single-step approach with integration of MACE information provides an alternative to the current method used in Canadian genomic evaluations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".