Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Genetic Screens02:46

Genetic Screens

4.6K
Genetic screens are tools used to identify genes and mutations responsible for phenotypes of interest. Genetic screens help identify individuals or a group of people at risk of developing  genetic diseases and help them with early intervention, targeted therapy, and reproductive options.
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which...
4.6K
In vitro Mutagenesis01:16

In vitro Mutagenesis

4.9K
4.9K
Genome Copying Errors02:46

Genome Copying Errors

4.3K
DNA replication is a well-evolved process that copies millions of base pairs with high fidelity during each cell division. Occasionally a wrong base or a long stretch of wrong bases may get added to the daughter strands. If the errors are left unchecked, cells might accumulate several mutations that might endanger their  survival. Therefore, the copying errors are checked and repaired at three levels.
4.3K
Genetics of Speciation02:16

Genetics of Speciation

19.0K
Speciation is the evolutionary process resulting in the formation of new, distinct species—groups of reproductively isolated populations.
19.0K
Background and Environment Affect Phenotype02:27

Background and Environment Affect Phenotype

5.8K
Although the genetic makeup of an organism plays a major role in determining the phenotype, there are also several environmental factors, such as temperature, oxygen availability, presence of mutagens, that can alter an organism’s phenotype.
An example of how genetic background affects phenotype can be seen in horses. The Extension gene in horses is responsible for their coat color. A wild-type gene (EE) produces black pigment in the coat, while a mutant gene (ee) produces red pigment. A...
5.8K
Frequency-dependent Selection01:21

Frequency-dependent Selection

20.1K
When the fitness of a trait is influenced by how common it is (i.e., its frequency) relative to different traits within a population, this is referred to as frequency-dependent selection. Frequency-dependent selection may occur between species or within a single species. This type of selection can either be positive—with more common phenotypes having higher fitness—or negative, with rarer phenotypes conferring increased fitness.
20.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Blood plasma proteome analysis reveals biological mechanisms and potential biomarkers underlying feed efficiency in Texel sheep.

Tropical animal health and production·2026
Same author

Genetic parameters via predictivity in large populations under strong genomic selection.

Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE·2026
Same author

Review: Genomic blueprint of cow longevity.

Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience·2026
Same author

The International, Prospective COSMOS (CytOSorb® TreatMent Of Critically Ill PatientS) Registry: Interim Results in Patients with Septic Shock.

Annals of intensive care·2026
Same author

Methods for joint genetic prediction of multiple ordinal categorical and continuous traits.

Genetics·2026
Same author

Using predictivity to estimate heritabilities and genetic correlations over time for growth traits in a large genotyped angus cattle population.

Journal of animal science·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 5, 2026

In Vivo Modeling of the Morbid Human Genome using Danio rerio
12:31

In Vivo Modeling of the Morbid Human Genome using Danio rerio

Published on: August 24, 2013

22.2K

Genotyping errors can affect indirect predictions of young selection candidates: A simulation study.

Alberto Cesarani1,2, Fernando Bussiman1, Jorge Hidalgo1

  • 1Department of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602.

JDS Communications
|May 4, 2026
PubMed
Summary

Genotyping errors significantly impact indirect predictions (IP) in dairy cattle breeding. Higher error rates reduce prediction accuracy and introduce bias, emphasizing the need for precise genotype data.

More Related Videos

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry
05:53

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Published on: June 21, 2018

9.2K
Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing
10:36

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

14.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 5, 2026

In Vivo Modeling of the Morbid Human Genome using Danio rerio
12:31

In Vivo Modeling of the Morbid Human Genome using Danio rerio

Published on: August 24, 2013

22.2K
Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry
05:53

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Published on: June 21, 2018

9.2K
Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing
10:36

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

14.6K

Area of Science:

  • Animal Genetics
  • Quantitative Genetics
  • Genomic Selection

Background:

  • Indirect prediction (IP) is crucial for estimating breeding values in young animals.
  • Genotyping errors can potentially compromise the accuracy of genomic predictions.
  • The impact of varying SNP error rates on IP accuracy in dairy cattle requires detailed evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To quantify the effect of simulated genotyping errors on indirect predictions (IP) in dairy cattle.
  • To assess the accuracy and bias of IP under different SNP error rates (5%, 10%, 20%).

Main Methods:

  • Simulated a dairy cattle population using QMSim with 5 replicates.
  • Computed benchmark genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) using full single-step genomic BLUP.
  • Introduced varying SNP error rates to genotypes of selection candidates and evaluated IP accuracy using correct and erroneous genotype files.

Main Results:

  • Average IP values decreased as genotyping error rates increased.
  • Correlation between benchmark GEBV and IP decreased from 0.98 (no errors) to 0.93 (20% errors).
  • Regression coefficient of GEBV on IP increased with error rates, indicating increased underdispersion of breeding values.

Conclusions:

  • Accurate genotype calls are essential for precise and unbiased indirect predictions in young dairy cattle.
  • Genotyping errors lead to reduced accuracy and increased bias in IP, necessitating stringent quality control.
  • The study underscores the importance of reliable genotype data for effective genomic selection programs.