Transmission ratio distortion regions in the context of genomic evaluation and their effects on reproductive traits in cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transmission ratio distortion (TRD), which is a deviation from Mendelian expectations, has been associated with basic mechanisms of life such as sperm and ova fertility and viability at developmental stages of the reproductive cycle. In this study different models including TRD regions were tested for different reproductive traits [days from first service to conception (FSTC), number of services, first service nonreturn rate (NRR), and stillbirth (SB)]. Thus, in addition to a basic model with systematic and random effects, including genetic effects modeled through a genomic relationship matrix, we developed 2 additional models, including a second genomic relationship matrix based on TRD regions, and TRD regions as a random effect assuming heterogeneous variances. The analyses were performed with 10,623 cows and 1,520 bulls genotyped for 47,910 SNPs, 590 TRD regions, and several records ranging from 9,587 (FSTC) to 19,667 (SB). The results of this study showed the ability of TRD regions to capture some additional genetic variance for some traits; however, this did not translate into higher accuracy for genomic prediction. This could be explained by the nature of TRD itself, which may arise in different stages of the reproductive cycle. Nevertheless, important effects of TRD regions were found on SB (31 regions) and NRR (18 regions) when comparing at-risk versus control matings, especially for regions with allelic TRD pattern. Particularly for NRR, the probability of observing nonpregnant cow increases by up to 27% for specific TRD regions, and the probability of observing stillbirth increased by up to 254%. These results support the relevance of several TRD regions on some reproductive traits, especially those with allelic patterns that have not received as much attention as recessive TRD patterns.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".