Loading…

Comparing methodologies to estimate fixed genetic effects and to predict genetic values for an Angus × Nellore cattle population

The study assesses the need for and effectiveness of using ridge regression when estimating regression coefficients of covariates representing genetic effects due to breed proportion in a crossbreed genetic evaluation. It also compares 2 ways of selecting the ridge parameters. A large crossbred Angu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of animal science 2016-02, Vol.94 (2), p.500-513
Main Authors: Bertoli, C D, Braccini, J, Roso, V M
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 513
container_issue 2
container_start_page 500
container_title Journal of animal science
container_volume 94
creator Bertoli, C D
Braccini, J
Roso, V M
description The study assesses the need for and effectiveness of using ridge regression when estimating regression coefficients of covariates representing genetic effects due to breed proportion in a crossbreed genetic evaluation. It also compares 2 ways of selecting the ridge parameters. A large crossbred Angus ... Nellore population with 294,045 records for weaning gain and 148,443 records for postweaning gain was used. Phenotypic visual scores varying from 1 to 5 for weaning and postweaning conformation, weaning and postweaning precocity, weaning and postweaning muscling, and scrotal circumference were analyzed. Three models were used to assess the need for ridge regression, having 4, 6, and 8 genetic covariates. All 3 models included the fixed contemporary group effect and random animal, maternal, and permanent environment effects. Model AH included fixed direct and maternal breed additive and the direct and maternal heterosis covariates, model AHE also included direct and maternal epistatic loss covariates, and model AHEC further included direct and maternal complementarity effects. The normal approach is to include these covariates as fixed effects in the model. However, being all derived from breed proportions, they are highly collinear and, consequently, may be poorly estimated. Ridge regression has been proposed as a method of reducing the collinearity. We found that collinearity was not a problem for models AH and AHE. We found a high variance inflation factor, >20, associated with some maternal covariates in the AHEC model reflecting instability of the regression coefficients and that this instability was well addressed by using ridge regression using a ridge parameter calculated from the variance inflation factor.
doi_str_mv 10.2527/jas2015-9344
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2033280826</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2033280826</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_20332808263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjLtOxDAQRS3ESoRHxweMRB3wY71kS7QCUW1Fv7KScdaR4wn2BNHyFXwQP0aQEDXVLc45V4hrJW-11fd3gytaKltvzXp9Iiplta2N2phTUUmpVd00Sp-J81IGKZW2W1uJjx2Nk8sh9TAiH6mjSH3AAkyAhcPoGMGHd-ygx4QcWkDvseUCLnU_1pSxCy3_4TcX56X3lBcDHlI_F_j6hD3GSBmhdcwRYaJpjo4DpUux8i4WvPrdC3Hz9Piye66nTK_LEx8GmnNa0EFLY3QjG70x_7O-AUiTWAE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2033280826</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing methodologies to estimate fixed genetic effects and to predict genetic values for an Angus × Nellore cattle population</title><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Bertoli, C D ; Braccini, J ; Roso, V M</creator><creatorcontrib>Bertoli, C D ; Braccini, J ; Roso, V M</creatorcontrib><description>The study assesses the need for and effectiveness of using ridge regression when estimating regression coefficients of covariates representing genetic effects due to breed proportion in a crossbreed genetic evaluation. It also compares 2 ways of selecting the ridge parameters. A large crossbred Angus ... Nellore population with 294,045 records for weaning gain and 148,443 records for postweaning gain was used. Phenotypic visual scores varying from 1 to 5 for weaning and postweaning conformation, weaning and postweaning precocity, weaning and postweaning muscling, and scrotal circumference were analyzed. Three models were used to assess the need for ridge regression, having 4, 6, and 8 genetic covariates. All 3 models included the fixed contemporary group effect and random animal, maternal, and permanent environment effects. Model AH included fixed direct and maternal breed additive and the direct and maternal heterosis covariates, model AHE also included direct and maternal epistatic loss covariates, and model AHEC further included direct and maternal complementarity effects. The normal approach is to include these covariates as fixed effects in the model. However, being all derived from breed proportions, they are highly collinear and, consequently, may be poorly estimated. Ridge regression has been proposed as a method of reducing the collinearity. We found that collinearity was not a problem for models AH and AHE. We found a high variance inflation factor, &gt;20, associated with some maternal covariates in the AHEC model reflecting instability of the regression coefficients and that this instability was well addressed by using ridge regression using a ridge parameter calculated from the variance inflation factor.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8812</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-3163</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2527/jas2015-9344</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Champaign: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Animal populations ; Cattle industry ; Collinearity ; Complementarity ; Conformation ; Environmental effects ; Epistasis ; Genetic effects ; Heterosis ; Parameters ; Population studies ; Regression analysis ; Regression coefficients ; Stability ; Studies ; Variance ; Weaning</subject><ispartof>Journal of animal science, 2016-02, Vol.94 (2), p.500-513</ispartof><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press, UK Feb 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bertoli, C D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braccini, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roso, V M</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing methodologies to estimate fixed genetic effects and to predict genetic values for an Angus × Nellore cattle population</title><title>Journal of animal science</title><description>The study assesses the need for and effectiveness of using ridge regression when estimating regression coefficients of covariates representing genetic effects due to breed proportion in a crossbreed genetic evaluation. It also compares 2 ways of selecting the ridge parameters. A large crossbred Angus ... Nellore population with 294,045 records for weaning gain and 148,443 records for postweaning gain was used. Phenotypic visual scores varying from 1 to 5 for weaning and postweaning conformation, weaning and postweaning precocity, weaning and postweaning muscling, and scrotal circumference were analyzed. Three models were used to assess the need for ridge regression, having 4, 6, and 8 genetic covariates. All 3 models included the fixed contemporary group effect and random animal, maternal, and permanent environment effects. Model AH included fixed direct and maternal breed additive and the direct and maternal heterosis covariates, model AHE also included direct and maternal epistatic loss covariates, and model AHEC further included direct and maternal complementarity effects. The normal approach is to include these covariates as fixed effects in the model. However, being all derived from breed proportions, they are highly collinear and, consequently, may be poorly estimated. Ridge regression has been proposed as a method of reducing the collinearity. We found that collinearity was not a problem for models AH and AHE. We found a high variance inflation factor, &gt;20, associated with some maternal covariates in the AHEC model reflecting instability of the regression coefficients and that this instability was well addressed by using ridge regression using a ridge parameter calculated from the variance inflation factor.</description><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Cattle industry</subject><subject>Collinearity</subject><subject>Complementarity</subject><subject>Conformation</subject><subject>Environmental effects</subject><subject>Epistasis</subject><subject>Genetic effects</subject><subject>Heterosis</subject><subject>Parameters</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Regression coefficients</subject><subject>Stability</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Variance</subject><subject>Weaning</subject><issn>0021-8812</issn><issn>1525-3163</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNjLtOxDAQRS3ESoRHxweMRB3wY71kS7QCUW1Fv7KScdaR4wn2BNHyFXwQP0aQEDXVLc45V4hrJW-11fd3gytaKltvzXp9Iiplta2N2phTUUmpVd00Sp-J81IGKZW2W1uJjx2Nk8sh9TAiH6mjSH3AAkyAhcPoGMGHd-ygx4QcWkDvseUCLnU_1pSxCy3_4TcX56X3lBcDHlI_F_j6hD3GSBmhdcwRYaJpjo4DpUux8i4WvPrdC3Hz9Piye66nTK_LEx8GmnNa0EFLY3QjG70x_7O-AUiTWAE</recordid><startdate>20160201</startdate><enddate>20160201</enddate><creator>Bertoli, C D</creator><creator>Braccini, J</creator><creator>Roso, V M</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>U9A</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160201</creationdate><title>Comparing methodologies to estimate fixed genetic effects and to predict genetic values for an Angus × Nellore cattle population</title><author>Bertoli, C D ; Braccini, J ; Roso, V M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_20332808263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Cattle industry</topic><topic>Collinearity</topic><topic>Complementarity</topic><topic>Conformation</topic><topic>Environmental effects</topic><topic>Epistasis</topic><topic>Genetic effects</topic><topic>Heterosis</topic><topic>Parameters</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Regression coefficients</topic><topic>Stability</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Variance</topic><topic>Weaning</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bertoli, C D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braccini, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roso, V M</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Career &amp; Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of animal science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bertoli, C D</au><au>Braccini, J</au><au>Roso, V M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing methodologies to estimate fixed genetic effects and to predict genetic values for an Angus × Nellore cattle population</atitle><jtitle>Journal of animal science</jtitle><date>2016-02-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>94</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>500</spage><epage>513</epage><pages>500-513</pages><issn>0021-8812</issn><eissn>1525-3163</eissn><abstract>The study assesses the need for and effectiveness of using ridge regression when estimating regression coefficients of covariates representing genetic effects due to breed proportion in a crossbreed genetic evaluation. It also compares 2 ways of selecting the ridge parameters. A large crossbred Angus ... Nellore population with 294,045 records for weaning gain and 148,443 records for postweaning gain was used. Phenotypic visual scores varying from 1 to 5 for weaning and postweaning conformation, weaning and postweaning precocity, weaning and postweaning muscling, and scrotal circumference were analyzed. Three models were used to assess the need for ridge regression, having 4, 6, and 8 genetic covariates. All 3 models included the fixed contemporary group effect and random animal, maternal, and permanent environment effects. Model AH included fixed direct and maternal breed additive and the direct and maternal heterosis covariates, model AHE also included direct and maternal epistatic loss covariates, and model AHEC further included direct and maternal complementarity effects. The normal approach is to include these covariates as fixed effects in the model. However, being all derived from breed proportions, they are highly collinear and, consequently, may be poorly estimated. Ridge regression has been proposed as a method of reducing the collinearity. We found that collinearity was not a problem for models AH and AHE. We found a high variance inflation factor, &gt;20, associated with some maternal covariates in the AHEC model reflecting instability of the regression coefficients and that this instability was well addressed by using ridge regression using a ridge parameter calculated from the variance inflation factor.</abstract><cop>Champaign</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.2527/jas2015-9344</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8812
ispartof Journal of animal science, 2016-02, Vol.94 (2), p.500-513
issn 0021-8812
1525-3163
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2033280826
source Oxford Journals Online
subjects Animal populations
Cattle industry
Collinearity
Complementarity
Conformation
Environmental effects
Epistasis
Genetic effects
Heterosis
Parameters
Population studies
Regression analysis
Regression coefficients
Stability
Studies
Variance
Weaning
title Comparing methodologies to estimate fixed genetic effects and to predict genetic values for an Angus × Nellore cattle population
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T15%3A14%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20methodologies%20to%20estimate%20fixed%20genetic%20effects%20and%20to%20predict%20genetic%20values%20for%20an%20Angus%20%C3%97%20Nellore%20cattle%20population&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20animal%20science&rft.au=Bertoli,%20C%20D&rft.date=2016-02-01&rft.volume=94&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=500&rft.epage=513&rft.pages=500-513&rft.issn=0021-8812&rft.eissn=1525-3163&rft_id=info:doi/10.2527/jas2015-9344&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2033280826%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_20332808263%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2033280826&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true