
doi: 10.7939/r3mw4x
This work focuses on the evaluation of a bagging EB method in terms of its ability to select a subset of QTL-related markers for accurate EBV prediction. Experiments were performed on several simulated and real datasets consisting of SNP genotypes and phenotypes. The simulated datasets modeled different dominance levels and different levels of background noises. Our results show that the bagging EB method is able to detect most of the simulated QTL, even with large background noises. The average recall of QTL detection was $0.71$. When using the markers detected by the bagging EB method to predict EBVs, the prediction accuracy improved dramatically on the simulation datasets compared to using the entire set of markers. However, the prediction accuracy did not improve much when doing the same experiments on the two real datasets. The best accuracy of EBV prediction we achieved for the dairy dataset is 0.57 and the best accuracy for the beef dataset is 0.73.
Genomic Selection, QTL Mapping
Genomic Selection, QTL Mapping
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
