Suggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Subsequent generations had breeding values drawn from the same distribution.
Similar(59)
Each animal in the base population was assigned a direct and indirect breeding value, drawn from N 0 0, σ A D 2 σ A DI σ A DI σ A I 2. The σ A D 2 and σ A I 2 were set to 1.00, and σ A DI was set to −0.50, 0.00 or 0.50.
The values for time were integer values drawn from a uniform distribution.
Simulation was initialized with concentration values drawn from a uniform distribution between 0.3 and 0.7.
To generate residual polygenic effects, breeding values of founder animals were drawn from a normal distribution N (0, σ u 2 ) with polygenic variance σ u 2 set to 30% of the total genetic variance.
Artificial selection was performed using the best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) of breeding values obtained from an animal model.
The statistical properties of breeding values resulting from the mixed model approach still hold for a population under selection.
Estimated breeding values from routine breeding estimation were used for fertility traits.
GS is based on the prediction of breeding values from individual genotypes (estimated genomic breeding values, GEBV).
The EBV1 values were therefore used as the true breeding values, the standard against which other estimated breeding values from the cross-validation studies were compared.
More specifically, for each iteration from the model, we computed the average breeding values per generation of (i) actual estimated breeding values from the population and (ii) simulated breeding values under drift (rbv function in MCMCglmm).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com