Incorporating information of causal variants in genomic prediction using GBLUP or machine learning models in a simulated livestock population

Our results show that incorporating QTL information in GBLUP and SVR can improve prediction accuracy, but the extent of improvement varies across models. RF had a much lower prediction accuracy than the other models and did not show improvements when QTL information was added. Two possible reasons for this result are that the data structure in our data does not allow RF to fully realize its potential and that RF is not designed well for this particular prediction problem. Our study highlighted the importance of selecting appropriate models for genomic prediction and underscored the potential limitations of machine learning models when applied to genomic prediction in livestock.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology/Journal of animal science and biotechnology
Published
2025-08-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-025-01250-5
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.63

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Incorporating information of causal variants in genomic prediction using GBLUP or machine learning models in a simulated livestock population

Yvonne C. J. Wientjes, M.P.L. Calus, Pascal Duenk, J.Y. Yang et al.
2 citations
Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology/Journal of animal science and biotechnology
Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
3.63
article

Incorporating information of causal variants in genomic prediction using GBLUP or machine learning models in a simulated livestock population

Yvonne C. J. Wientjes, M.P.L. Calus, Pascal Duenk, J.Y. Yang, T.H.E. Meuwissen
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Our results show that incorporating QTL information in GBLUP and SVR can improve prediction accuracy, but the extent of improvement varies across models. RF had a much lower prediction accuracy than the other models and did not show improvements when QTL information was added. Two possible reasons for this result are that the data structure in our data does not allow RF to fully realize its potential and that RF is not designed well for this particular prediction problem. Our study highlighted the importance of selecting appropriate models for genomic prediction and underscored the potential limitations of machine learning models when applied to genomic prediction in livestock.

Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology/Journal of animal science and biotechnologyVol. 16(1)
Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NO), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
China Scholarship Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
3.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.