↓ Skip to main content

Genomic prediction in an admixed population of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
4 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genomic prediction in an admixed population of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00402
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jørgen Ødegård, Thomas Moen, Nina Santi, Sven A. Korsvoll, Sissel Kjøglum, Theo H. E. Meuwissen

Abstract

Reliability of genomic selection (GS) models was tested in an admixed population of Atlantic salmon, originating from crossing of several wild subpopulations. The models included ordinary genomic BLUP models (GBLUP), using genome-wide SNP markers of varying densities (1-220 k), a genomic identity-by-descent model (IBD-GS), using linkage analysis of sparse genome-wide markers, as well as a classical pedigree-based model. Reliabilities of the models were compared through 5-fold cross-validation. The traits studied were salmon lice (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) resistance (LR), measured as (log) density on the skin and fillet color (FC), with respective estimated heritabilities of 0.14 and 0.43. All genomic models outperformed the classical pedigree-based model, for both traits and at all marker densities. However, the relative improvement differed considerably between traits, models and marker densities. For the highly heritable FC, the IBD-GS had similar reliability as GBLUP at high marker densities (>22 k). In contrast, for the lowly heritable LR, IBD-GS was clearly inferior to GBLUP, irrespective of marker density. Hence, GBLUP was robust to marker density for the lowly heritable LR, but sensitive to marker density for the highly heritable FC. We hypothesize that this phenomenon may be explained by historical admixture of different founder populations, expected to reduce short-range lice density (LD) and induce long-range LD. The relative importance of LD/relationship information is expected to decrease/increase with increasing heritability of the trait. Still, using the ordinary GBLUP, the typical long-range LD of an admixed population may be effectively captured by sparse markers, while efficient utilization of relationship information may require denser markers (e.g., 22 k or more).

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 153 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 18%
Student > Master 24 15%
Other 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 28 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 83 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 5%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 34 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2020.
All research outputs
#4,509,231
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,382
of 11,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,675
of 361,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#15
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,837 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.