## References

Aguilar, I, Legarra, A and Misztal, I
2013. Genetic evaluation using unsymmetric single step genomic methodology with large number of genotypes. Interbull Bulletin
47, 222–225.

Aguilar, I, Misztal, I, Johnson, DL, Legarra, A, Tsuruta, S and Lawlor, TJ
2010. A unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score. Journal of Dairy Science
93, 743–752.

Aguilar, I, Misztal, I, Legarra, A and Tsuruta, S
2011. Efficient computation of genomic relationship matrix and other matrices used in single-step evaluation. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics
128, 422–428.

Christensen, OF and Lund, MS
2010. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genetics Selection Evolution
42, 2.

Colleau, JJ
2002. An indirect approach to the extensive calculation of relationship coefficients. Genetics Selection Evolution
34, 409–421.

Faux, P and Gengler, N
2013. Inversion of a part of the numerator relationship matrix using pedigree information. Genetics Selection Evolution
45, 45.

Fernando, RL, Dekkers, JCM and Garrick, DJ
2014. A class of Bayesian methods to combine large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals for whole-genome analyses. Genetics Selection Evolution
46, 50.

Fragomeni, BO, Lourenco, DAL, Tsuruta, S, Masuda, Y, Aguilar, I, Legarra, A, Lawlor, TJ and Misztal, I
2015. Hot topic: use of genomic recursions in single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP) with a large number of genotypes. Journal of Dairy Science
98, 4090–4094.

George, A and Liu, JW
1981. Computer solution of large sparse positive definite systems. Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Hills, NJ, USA.

Gianola, D, de los Campos, G, Hill, WG, Manfredi, E and Fernando, RL
2009. Additive genetic variability and the Bayesian alphabet. Genetics
183, 347–363.

Golden, BL., Fernando, RL and Garrick, DJ
2016. Bolt and an alternative approach to genomic EPDs. Proceedings of the Beef Improvement Federation, June 14–17, 2016, Manhattan, KS, USA, pp. 102–106.

Legarra, A, Aguilar, I and Misztal, I
2009. A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. Journal of Dairy Science
92, 4656–4663.

Legarra, A, Christensen, OF, Aguilar, I and Misztal, I
2014. Single step, a general approach for genomic selection. Livestock Science
166, 54–65.

Legarra, A and Ducrocq, V
2012. Computational strategies for national integration of phenotypic, genomic, and pedigree data in single-step best linear unbiased prediction. Journal of Dairy Science
95, 4629–4645.

Legarra, A and Misztal, I
2008. Computing strategies in genome-wide selection. Journal of Dairy Science
91, 360–366.

Liu, Z, Goddard, ME, Reinhardt, F and Reents, R
2014. A single-step genomic model with direct estimation of marker effects. Journal of Dairy Science
97, 5833–5850.

Lourenco, DAL, Tsuruta, S, Fragomeni, BO, Masuda, Y, Aguilar, I, Legarra, A, Bertrand, JK, Amen, TS, Wang, L, Moser, DW and Misztal, I
2015. Genetic evaluation using single-step genomic BLUP in American Angus. Journal of Animal Science
93, 2653–2662.

Masuda, Y, Misztal, I, Tsuruta, S, Legarra, A, Aguilar, I, Lourenco, DAL, Fragomeni, B and Lawlor, TL
2016. Implementation of genomic recursions in single-step genomic BLUP for US Holsteins with a large number of genotyped animals. Journal of Dairy Science
99, 1968–1974.

Masuda, Y, Tsuruta, S, Aguilar, I and Misztal, I
2015. Technical note: acceleration of sparse operations for average-information REML analyses with supernodal methods and sparse-storage refinements. Journal of Animal Science
93, 4670–4674.

Meuwissen, THE, Hayes, BJ and Goddard, ME
2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics
157, 1819–1829.

Meuwissen, THE, Svendsen, M, Solberg, T and Ødegård, J
2015. Genomic predictions based on animal models using genotype imputation on a national scale in Norwegian Red cattle. Genetics Selection Evolution
47, 79.

Misztal, I
2014. Computational techniques in animal breeding. Retrieved on 20 April 2016 from nce.ads.uga.edu.
Misztal, I
2016. Inexpensive computation of the inverse of the genomic relationship matrix in populations with small effective population size. Genetics
202, 401–409.

Misztal, I and Gianola, D
1987. Indirect solution of mixed model equations. Journal of Dairy Science
70, 716–723.

Misztal, I, Legarra, A and Aguilar, I
2009. Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information. Journal of Dairy Science
92, 4648–4655.

Misztal, I, Legarra, A and Aguilar, I
2014. Using recursion to compute the inverse of the genomic relationship matrix. Journal of Dairy Science
97, 3943–3952.

Misztal, I and Perez-Enciso, M
1993. Sparse matrix inversion for restricted maximum likelihood estimation of variance components by expectation-maximization. Journal of Dairy Science
76, 1479–1483.

Mrode, RA
2014. Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values, 2nd and 3rd edition. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.

Pérez-Enciso, M, Misztal, I and Elzo, MA
1994. FSPAK: an interface for public domain sparse matrix subroutines. Proceedings of 5th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 7–12 August, Guelph, ON, Canada 22, 87–88.

Pocrnic, I, Lourenco, DAL, Masuda, Y, Legarra, A and Misztal, I
2016a. The dimensionality of genomic information and ts effect on genomic prediction. Genetics 203, 573–581.

Pocrnic, I, Lourenco, DAL, Masuda, Y and Misztal, I
2016b. Dimensionality of genomic information and performance of Algorithm for Proven and Young for different livestock species. Genetics Selection Evolution 48, 82.

Schaeffer, LR
2006. Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics
123, 218–223.

Schaeffer, LR and Kennedy, BW
1986. Computing strategies for solving mixed model equations. Journal of Dairy Science
69, 575–579.

Strandén, I and Garrick, DJ
2009. Technical note: derivation of equivalent computing algorithms for genomic predictions and reliabilities of animal merit. Journal of Dairy Science
92, 2971–2975.

Strandén, I and Christensen, OF
2011. Allele coding in genomic evaluation. Genetics Selection Evolution
43, 25.

Strandén, I and Lidauer, M
1999. Solving large mixed linear models using preconditioned conjugate gradient iteration. Journal of Dairy Science
82, 2779–2787.

Strandén, I and Mäntysaari, EA
2014. Comparison of some equivalent equations to solve single-step GBLUP. In Proceedings of 10th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 17–22 August, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Sun, X, Qu, L, Garrick, DJ, Dekkers, JCM and Fernando, RL
2012. A fast EM algorithm for BayesA-like prediction of genomic breeding values. PLoS One
7, e49157.

Takahashi, K, Fagan, J and Chen, MS
1973. Formation of a sparse bus impedance matrix and its application to short circuit study. In Proceedings of 8th Power Industry Computer Applications Conference, 3–6 June, Minneapolis, MN, USA, p. 63.

Tsuruta, S, Misztal, I and Stranden, I
2001. Use of the preconditioned conjugate gradient algorithm as a generic solver for mixed-model equations in animal breeding applications. Journal of Animal Science
79, 1166–1172.

VanRaden, PM
2008. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. Journal of Dairy Science
91, 4414–4423.

VanRaden, PM, Van Tassell, CP, Wiggans, GR, Sonstegard, TS, Schnabel, RD, Taylor, JF and Schenkel, FS
2009. Invited review: reliability of genomic predictions for North American Holstein bulls. Journal of Dairy Science
92, 16–24.

Wang, H, Misztal, I, Aguilar, I, Legarra, A and Muir, WM
2012. Genome-wide association mapping including phenotypes from relatives without genotypes. Genetics Research
94, 73–83.

Wang, H, Misztal, I and Legarra, A
2014. Differences between genomic-based and pedigree-based relationships in a chicken population, as a function of quality control and pedigree links among individuals. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics
131, 445–451.

Zhang, Z, Liu, J, Ding, X, Bijma, P, de Koning, DJ and Zhang, Q
2010. Best linear unbiased prediction of genomic breeding values using a trait-specific marker-derived relationship matrix. PLoS One
5, e12648.