Effect of genomic selection and genotyping strategy on estimation of variance components in animal models using different relationship matrices

Table 4 Estimates of variance components (SE) from H-AM using three subsets of the real data

Subset^a	Data	\(\hat{\sigma }_{a}^{2}\)	\(\hat{\sigma }_{m}^{2}\)	\(\hat{\sigma }_{e}^{2}\)	Number of genotyped birds (genotyping proportion %)
1	All	29,054 (297.4)^*	643.0 (56.3)^*	6719 (104.5)^*	17,838 (16.43)
1	Male	6341 (514.4)	1872.6 (128.6)	20,824 (281.3)	3000 (5.57)
2	Female	14,651 (409.9)^*	755.5 (72.3)	7065 (176.8)^*	8000 (14.62)
2	Female	6020 (434.0)	1068.9 (80.4)^*	11,011 (225.0)^*	4000 (7.31)
3	Male	31,722 (1824.4)^*	1977.1 (401.9)	10,979 (691.2)^*	3000 (30)

\(\hat{\sigma }_{a}^{2}\): genetic variance
\(\hat{\sigma }_{m}^{2}\): variance of maternal permanent environmental effects
\(\hat{\sigma }_{e}^{2}\): residual variance
H-AM Animal model with combined pedigree-based and genomic relationship matrix
^*Significantly different comparing against the H-AM estimates for the same group (All, Male, Female) in Table 3 (P < 0.05)
^aFor description of the Subsets see the main text

ISSN: 1297-9686