ArticleJDS communications2024
Accounting for the nuclear and mito genome in dairy cattle breeding-A simulation study.
Article in JDS communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Phylogenetic Position of Hungarian Grey Cattle Breed Based on Total-Representation Sample.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mitochondria play a significant role in numerous cellular processes through proteins encoded by both the nuclear genome (nDNA) and mito genome (mDNA), and increasing evidence shows that traits of interest might be affected by mito-nuclear interactions. Whereas the variation in nDNA is influenced by mutations and recombination of parental genomes, the variation in mDNA is solely driven by mutations. In addition, mDNA is inherited in a haploid form, from the dam. Cattle populations show substantial variation in mDNA between and within breeds. Past research suggests that variation in mDNA accounts for 1% to 5% of the phenotypic variation in dairy traits. Here we simulated a dairy cattle breeding program to assess the impact of accounting for mDNA variation in pedigree-based and genome-based genetic evaluations on the accuracy of EBVs for mDNA and nDNA components. We also examined the impact of alternative definitions of breeding values on genetic gain, including nDNA and mDNA components that both affect phenotype expression, but mDNA is inherited only maternally. We found that accounting for mDNA variation increased accuracy between +0.01 and +0.03 for different categories of animals, especially for young bulls (+0.03) and females without genotype data (between +0.01 and +0.03). Different scenarios of modeling and breeding value definition affected genetic gain. The standard approach of ignoring mDNA variation achieved competitive genetic gain. Modeling but not selecting on mDNA expectedly reduced genetic gain, whereas optimal use of mDNA variation recovered the genetic gain.
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.