Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41239183›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2026

Genomic prediction of feed efficiency in boars by deep learning.

Olumide Onabanjo, Theo Meuwissen, Hans Magnus Gjøen, Fadi Al Machot, Maren van Son, Peer Berg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Olumide OnabanjoDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Ås, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-3237-5013
Theo MeuwissenDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Ås, Norway.
Hans Magnus GjøenDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Ås, Norway.
Fadi Al MachotDepartment of Data Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Ås, Norway.
Maren van SonNorsvin SA, 2317, Hamar, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4892-3387
Peer BergDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 1432 Ås, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pork is the most widely consumed meat globally, and the industry has achieved substantial genetic advancements for several traits using genomic selection. However, traditional linear genomic prediction models may be inadequate for predicting complex traits, such as feed efficiency, as they primarily capture additive genetic effects and overlook nonadditive effects, including dominance and epistasis. Deep learning (DL) has the potential to address this limitation due to its ability to model nonlinear patterns inherent in genomic data. The objectives of this study were to compare the predictive ability of DL models to the linear models for predicting feed efficiency (FE) trait in 2 boar populations, estimate the nonadditive genetic variance captured by DL, and assess its effect on predictive ability. Our results showed that the DL models using the averaged-prediction method had the highest predictive ability in the sire line test population (0.381 for multilayer perceptron [MLP] and 0.377 for convolutional neural network [CNN]), compared to 0.366 for linear models. DL models also showed higher abilities in the dam line test population, with MLP achieving a predictive ability of 0.364. Additionally, we showed that DL models captured nonadditive variance; however, this did not significantly improve predictive ability. In conclusion, DL models, particularly MLP, demonstrated the highest predictive ability for FE, improving performance by approximately 4.1% for the sire line and 2.8% for the dam line compared to the traditional linear models. Therefore, DL models are recommended for predicting phenotypes and for estimating total genetic effects, including nonadditive components. However, this comes at a significant increase of computational cost.

Indexed as

Deep LearningGenomicsAnimal FeedAnimalsBreedingModels, GeneticPhenotypeSwinecomplex traitdeep learningfeed efficiencygenomic predictionnonadditive genetic variance

Identifiers

PMID41239183
PMCPMC12774587

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.