Table 4.
The impact of model choice for the top 100 animals after ranking animals on EBVs for the six traits compared to a model fitting only additive genetic variance or an A model
| Models | Comparison based on A model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BD | BWH | BT | FW | BL | FY | |
| A | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| AD | 6 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| ADM | — | — | — | — | 48 | 5 |
| AM | 52 | 52 | 26 | 53 | 43 | 5 |
| A* | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| A*D* | 7 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| A*D*M* | — | — | 30 | 58 | 48 | 5 |
| A*M* | 52 | 52 | 26 | 53 | 43 | 5 |
The number shown is the number of top animals in A models that are excluded when fitting an alternative model, therefore the 0 for the A model is by definition. The dash indicates no additive variation was detected and so no EBVs were available