English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The main objectives of this study were to compare the prediction accuracy of different Bayesian methods for traits with a wide range of genetic architecture using simulation and real data and to assess the sensitivity of these methods to the violation of their assumptions. For the simulation study, different scenarios were implemented based on two traits with low or high heritability and different numbers of QTL and the distribution of their effects. For real data analysis, a German Holstein dataset for milk fat percentage, milk yield, and somatic cell score was used. The simulation results showed that, with the exception of the Bayes R, the other methods were sensitive to changes in the number of QTLs and distribution of QTL effects. Having a distribution of QTL effects, similar to what different Bayesian methods assume for estimating marker effects, did not improve their prediction accuracy. The Bayes B method gave higher or equal accuracy rather than the rest. The real data analysis showed that similar to scenarios with a large number of QTLs in the simulation, there was no difference between the accuracies of the different methods for any of the traits.

Accuracy and sensitivity of different Bayesian methods for genomic prediction using simulation and real data