Original article Non-additive genetic effects for fertility traits in Canadian Holstein cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract – The effects of additive, dominance, additive by dominance, additive by additive and dominance by dominance genetic effects on age at first service, non-return rates and inter-val from calving to first service were estimated. Practical considerations of computing additive and dominance relationships using the genomic relationship matrix are discussed. The final strategy utilized several groups of 1000 animals (heifers or cows) in which all animals had a non-zero dominance relationship with at least one other animal in the group. Direct inversion of relationship matrices was possible within the 1000 animal subsets. Estimates of variances were obtained using Bayesian methodology via Gibbs sampling. Estimated non-additive genetic vari-ances were generally as large as or larger than the additive genetic variance in most cases, except for non-return rates and interval from calving to first service for cows. Non-additive genetic ef-fects appear to be of sizeable magnitude for fertility traits and should be included in models intended for estimating additive genetic merit. However, computing additive and dominance re-lationships for all possible pairs of individuals is very time consuming in populations of more than 200 000 animals. fertility / gene interactions / dairy cattle / non-additive models 1.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".