Attenuating effects of preferential treatment with Student-t mixed linear models: A simulation study

Genetics Selection Evolution

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 565-583

  Strandén, Ismo ^a,b   Gianola, Daniel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b ANIMAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH   (Finland)

Author keywords

Bayesian statistics; Dairy cattle; Gibbs sampling; Preferential treatment; Simulation; Student t distribution

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BREEDING; COW; EMBRYO TRANSFER; GENETIC VARIABILITY; NONHUMAN; OVULATION; QUANTITATIVE GENETICS; STATISTICAL MODEL; SYSTEM ANALYSIS;

ANIMALIA; BOS TAURUS;

EID: 0032415138     PISSN: 0999193X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1051/gse:19980603     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Albert J.H., Chib S., Bayesian analysis of binary and polychotomous response data, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 88 (1993) 669-679.
2. Besag J., Green P., Higdon D., Mengersen K., Bayesian computation and stochastic systems, Stat. Sci. 10 (1995) 3-66.
3. Burnside E.B., Meyer K., Potential impact of bovine somatotropin on dairy sire evaluation, J. Dairy Sci. 71 (1988) 2210-2219.
4. Geweke J., Bayesian treatment of the independent Student-t linear model, J. Appl. Econometrics 8 (1993) S19-S40.
5. Gianola D., Stranden I., Foulley J.L., Modelos lineales con distribuciones t: potencial en genetica quantitativa, Actas, 5ta Conferencia Espanola de Biometria, Valencia, Spain, 1995, pp. 3-4.
6. Gianola D., Sorensen D., A mixed effects threshold model with a t distribution, 47th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Lillehammer, Norway, 1996, 15 p.
7. Harbors A.G.F., Lohuis M.M., Dekkers J.C.M., Correction for preferential treatment of MOET families by including an environmental correlation in genetic evaluation, in: Proceedings of the 5th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Guelph, Canada, 1994, vol. 17, pp. 11-14.
8. Henderson C.R., Applications of Linear Models in Animal Breeding, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1984.
9. Kuhn M.T., Boettcher P.J., Freeman A.E., Potential biases in predicted transmitting abilities of females from preferential treatment, J. Dairy Sci. 77 (1994) 2428-2437.
10. Kuhn M.T., Freeman A.E., Biases in predicted transmitting abilities of sires when daughters receive preferential treatment, J. Dairy Sci. 78 (1995) 2007-2072.
11. Kulm M.T., Freeman A.E., Power transformations for reducing bias in genetic evaluation caused by preferential treatment, J. Dairy Sci. (Abstr.) (1996) suppl. 1, 143.
12. Lange K.L., Little R.J.A., Taylor J.M.G., Robust statistical modeling using the t distribution, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 84 (1989) 881-896.
13. Lange K., Sinsheimer J.S., Normal/Independent distributions and their applications in robust regression, J. Comp. Graph. Stat. 2 (1993) 175-198.
14. Law A.M., Kelton W.D., Simulation Modeling and Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1982.
15. Lidauer M., Mäntysaari E.A., Detection of bias in animal model pedigree indices of heifers, Agric. Food Sci. Finland 5 (1996) 387-397.
16. Mäntysaari E.A., Sillanpää M., Bias in pedigree indices of dairy bulls: Should the management group effects be fixed and should we use smaller heritability?, 44 th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Aarhus, Denmark, 1993, Abstracts I, pp. 236-237.
17. Murphy P.A., Everett R.W., Van Vleck L.D., Comparison of first lactations and all lactations of dams to predict sons' milk evaluation, J. Dairy Sci. 65 (1982) 1999-2005.
18. Nicholas F.W., Smith C., Increased rates of genetic change in dairy cattle by embryo transfer and splitting, Anim. Prod. 36 (1983) 341-353.
19. Powell R.L., Norman H.D., Accuracy of cow indexes according to repeatability, evaluation, herd yield, and registry status, J. Dairy Sci. 71 (1988) 2232-2240.
20. Rothschild M.F., Douglass L.W., Powell R.L., Prediction of son's modified contemporary comparison from pedigree information, J. Dairy Sci. 64 (1981) 331-341.
21. Stranden L, Mäki-Tanila A., Mäntysaari E.A., Genetic progress and rate of inbreeding in a closed adult MOET nucleus under different mating strategies and heritabilities, J. Anim. Breed. Genetics 108 (1991) 401-411.
22. Stranden L, Robust mixed effects linear models with t distributions and application to dairy cattle breeding, Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1996.
23. Stranden I., Gianola D., Gaussian versus Student-t mixed effects linear models for milk yield in Ayrshire cattle, 48th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Vienna, 1997, Abstracts 1, pp. 262-263.
24. Stranden I, Gianola D., Inferences about variance components in the univariate mixed linear t model using Laplacian-t approximations, in: Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Armidale, Australia, 1998, vol. 25, pp. 537-540.
25. Sutradhar B.C., Ali M.M., Estimation of the parameters of a regression model with a multivariate t error variable, Comm. Stat. Theory Meth. 15 (1986) 429-450.
26. Tempelman R.J., Firat M.Z., Beyond the linear mixed model: perceived versus real benefits, Proceedings of the Cth World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Armidale, Australia, 1998, vol. 25, pp. 605-612.
27. Uimari P., Mäntysaari E.A., Repeatability and bias of estimated breeding values for dairy bulls and bull dams calculated froin animal model evaluations, Anim. Prod. 57 (1993) 175-182.
28. Uimari P., Mäntysaari E.A., Relationship between bull dam herd characteristics and bias in estimated breeding values of bull, Agric. Sci. Finland 4 (1995) 463-472.
29. Weigel D.J., Pearson R.E., Hoeschele I., Impact of different strategies and amounts of preferential treatment on various methods of bull-dam selection, J. Dairy Sci. 77 (1994) 3163-3173.
30. West M., Outlier models and prior distributions in Bayesian linear regression, J. Roy. Statist. Soc. B 46 (1984) 431-439.
31. Zellner A., Bayesian and non-Bayesian analysis of the regression model with multivariate Student-t error terms, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 71 (1976) 400-405.