ReviewMarine life science & technology2024
Deep learning for genomic selection of aquatic animals.
Review in Marine life science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Epistatic Interactions into Genomic Prediction of Growth and Fillet Fat Content in Common Carp.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- The Priming Impacts of Early Hypoxia Exposure in Abalone Parents Are Transmitted to Offspring.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Molecular insights into insulin-like signaling and its positive role in growth of the bivalveMarine life science & technology · 2026Article
- Machine learning for genomic prediction of growth traits in aquaculture: a case study of the Australasian snapper (Chrysophrys auratus).BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of SNP-weighted, Bayesian, and machine learning models for genomic prediction in Holstein cattle.BMC genomics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic selection (GS) applied to the breeding of aquatic animals has been of great interest in recent years due to its higher accuracy and faster genetic progress than pedigree-based methods. The genetic analysis of complex traits in GS does not escape the current excitement around artificial intelligence, including a renewed interest in deep learning (DL), such as deep neural networks (DNNs), convolutional neural networks (CNNs), and autoencoders. This article reviews the current status and potential of DL applications in phenotyping, genotyping and genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) prediction of GS. It can be seen from this article that CNNs obtain phenotype data of aquatic animals efficiently, and without injury; DNNs as single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) variant callers are critical to have shown higher accuracy in assessments of genotyping for the next-generation sequencing (NGS); autoencoder-based genotype imputation approaches are capable of highly accurate genotype imputation by encoding complex genotype relationships in easily portable inference models; sparse DNNs capture nonlinear relationships among genes to improve the accuracy of GEBV prediction for aquatic animals. Furthermore, future directions of DL in aquaculture are also discussed, which should expand the application to more aquaculture species. We believe that DL will be applied increasingly to molecular breeding of aquatic animals in the future. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42995-024-00252-y.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.