scholarly journals Genomic prediction for crossbred performance using metafounders1

2018 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 548-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth M van Grevenhof ◽  
Jérémie Vandenplas ◽  
Mario P L Calus

Abstract Future genomic evaluation models to be used routinely in breeding programs for pigs and poultry need to be able to optimally use information of crossbred (CB) animals to predict breeding values for CB performance of purebred (PB) selection candidates. Important challenges in the commonly used single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) model are the definition of relationships between the different line compositions and the definition of the base generation per line. The use of metafounders (MFs) in ssGBLUP has been proposed to overcome these issues. When relationships between lines are known to be different from 0, the use of MFs generalizes the concept of genetic groups relying on the genotype data. Our objective was to investigate the effect of using MFs in genomic prediction for CB performance on estimated variance components, and accuracy and bias of GEBV. This was studied using stochastic simulation to generate data representing a three-way crossbreeding scheme in pigs, with the parental lines being either closely related or unrelated. Results show that using MFs, the variance components should be scaled appropriately, especially when basing them on estimates obtained with, for example a pedigree-based model. The accuracies of GEBV that were obtained using MFs were similar to accuracies without using MFs, regardless whether the lines involved in the CB were closely related or unrelated. The use of MFs resulted in a model that had similar or somewhat better convergence properties compared to other models. We recommend the use of MFs in ssGBLUP for genomic evaluations in crossbreeding schemes.

Genes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 266
Author(s):  
Hossein Mehrban ◽  
Masoumeh Naserkheil ◽  
Deuk Hwan Lee ◽  
Chungil Cho ◽  
Taejeong Choi ◽  
...  

The weighted single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) method has been proposed to exploit information from genotyped and non-genotyped relatives, allowing the use of weights for single-nucleotide polymorphism in the construction of the genomic relationship matrix. The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of genetic prediction using the following single-trait best linear unbiased prediction methods in Hanwoo beef cattle: pedigree-based (PBLUP), un-weighted (ssGBLUP), and weighted (WssGBLUP) single-step genomic methods. We also assessed the impact of alternative single and window weighting methods according to their effects on the traits of interest. The data was comprised of 15,796 phenotypic records for yearling weight (YW) and 5622 records for carcass traits (backfat thickness: BFT, carcass weight: CW, eye muscle area: EMA, and marbling score: MS). Also, the genotypic data included 6616 animals for YW and 5134 for carcass traits on the 43,950 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. The ssGBLUP showed significant improvement in genomic prediction accuracy for carcass traits (71%) and yearling weight (99%) compared to the pedigree-based method. The window weighting procedures performed better than single SNP weighting for CW (11%), EMA (11%), MS (3%), and YW (6%), whereas no gain in accuracy was observed for BFT. Besides, the improvement in accuracy between window WssGBLUP and the un-weighted method was low for BFT and MS, while for CW, EMA, and YW resulted in a gain of 22%, 15%, and 20%, respectively, which indicates the presence of relevant quantitative trait loci for these traits. These findings indicate that WssGBLUP is an appropriate method for traits with a large quantitative trait loci effect.


Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1557
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Melnikova ◽  
Artem Kabanov ◽  
Sergey Nikitin ◽  
Maria Somova ◽  
Sergey Kharitonov ◽  
...  

Replacement pigs’ genomic prediction for reproduction (total number and born alive piglets in the first parity), meat, fatness and growth traits (muscle depth, days to 100 kg and backfat thickness over 6–7 rib) was tested using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction ssGBLUP methodology. These traits were selected as the most economically significant and different in terms of heritability. The heritability for meat, fatness and growth traits varied from 0.17 to 0.39 and for reproduction traits from 0.12 to 0.14. We confirm from our data that ssGBLUP is the most appropriate method of genomic evaluation. The validation of genomic predictions was performed by calculating the correlation between preliminary GEBV (based on pedigree and genomic data only) with high reliable conventional estimates (EBV) (based on pedigree, own phenotype and offspring records) of validating animals. Validation datasets include 151 and 110 individuals for reproduction, meat and fattening traits, respectively. The level of correlation (r) between EBV and GEBV scores varied from +0.44 to +0.55 for meat and fatness traits, and from +0.75 to +0.77 for reproduction traits. Average breeding value (EBV) of group selected on genomic evaluation basis exceeded the group selected on parental average estimates by 22, 24 and 66% for muscle depth, days to 100 kg and backfat thickness over 6–7 rib, respectively. Prediction based on SNP markers data and parental estimates showed a significant increase in the reliability of low heritable reproduction traits (about 40%), which is equivalent to including information about 10 additional descendants for sows and 20 additional descendants for boars in the evaluation dataset.


2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 772
Author(s):  
Francisco J. Jahuey-Martínez ◽  
Gaspar M. Parra-Bracamonte ◽  
Dorian J. Garrick ◽  
Nicolás López-Villalobos ◽  
Juan C. Martínez-González ◽  
...  

Context Genomic prediction is now routinely used in many livestock species to rank individuals based on genomic breeding values (GEBV). Aims This study reports the first assessment aimed to evaluate the accuracy of direct GEBV for birth (BW) and weaning (WW) weights of registered Charolais cattle in Mexico. Methods The population assessed included 823 animals genotyped with an array of 77000 single nucleotide polymorphisms. Genomic prediction used genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), Bayes C (BC), and single-step Bayesian regression (SSBR) methods in comparison with a pedigree-based BLUP method. Key results Our results show that the genomic prediction methods provided low and similar accuracies to BLUP. The prediction accuracy of GBLUP and BC were identical at 0.31 for BW and 0.29 for WW, similar to BLUP. Prediction accuracies of SSBR for BW and WW were up to 4% higher than those by BLUP. Conclusions Genomic prediction is feasible under current conditions, and provides a slight improvement using SSBR. Implications Some limitations on reference population size and structure were identified and need to be addressed to obtain more accurate predictions in liveweight traits under the prevalent cattle breeding conditions of Mexico.


2021 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Trine M Villumsen ◽  
Guosheng Su ◽  
Bernt Guldbrandtsen ◽  
Torben Asp ◽  
Mogens S Lund

Abstract Genomic selection relies on single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are often collected using medium-density SNP arrays. In mink, no such array is available; instead, genotyping by sequencing (GBS) can be used to generate marker information. Here, we evaluated the effect of genomic selection for mink using GBS. We compared the estimated breeding values (EBVs) from single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (SSGBLUP) models to the EBV from ordinary pedigree-based BLUP models. We analyzed seven size and quality traits from the live grading of brown mink. The phenotype data consisted of ~20,600 records for the seven traits from the mink born between 2013 and 2016. Genotype data included 2,103 mink born between 2010 and 2014, mostly breeding animals. In total, 28,336 SNP markers from 391 scaffolds were available for genomic prediction. The pedigree file included 29,212 mink. The predictive ability was assessed by the correlation (r) between progeny trait deviation (PTD) and EBV, and the regression of PTD on EBV, using 5-fold cross-validation. For each fold, one-fifth of animals born in 2014 formed the validation set. For all traits, the SSGBLUP model resulted in higher accuracies than the BLUP model. The average increase in accuracy was 15% (between 3% for fur clarity and 28% for body weight). For three traits (body weight, silky appearance of the under wool, and guard hair thickness), the difference in r between the two models was significant (P < 0.05). For all traits, the regression slopes of PTD on EBV from SSGBLUP models were closer to 1 than regression slopes from BLUP models, indicating SSGBLUP models resulted in less bias of EBV for selection candidates than the BLUP models. However, the regression coefficients did not differ significantly. In conclusion, the SSGBLUP model is superior to conventional BLUP model in the accurate selection of superior animals, and, thus, it would increase genetic gain in a selective breeding program. In addition, this study shows that GBS data work well in genomic prediction in mink, demonstrating the potential of GBS for genomic selection in livestock species.


2012 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 115 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Boichard ◽  
F. Guillaume ◽  
A. Baur ◽  
P. Croiseau ◽  
M. N. Rossignol ◽  
...  

Genomic selection is implemented in French Holstein, Montbéliarde, and Normande breeds (70%, 16% and 12% of French dairy cows). A characteristic of the model for genomic evaluation is the use of haplotypes instead of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), so as to maximise linkage disequilibrium between markers and quantitative trait loci (QTLs). For each trait, a QTL-BLUP model (i.e. a best linear unbiased prediction model including QTL random effects) includes 300–700 trait-dependent chromosomal regions selected either by linkage disequilibrium and linkage analysis or by elastic net. This model requires an important effort to phase genotypes, detect QTLs, select SNPs, but was found to be the most efficient one among all tested ones. QTLs are defined within breed and many of them were found to be breed specific. Reference populations include 1800 and 1400 bulls in Montbéliarde and Normande breeds. In Holstein, the very large reference population of 18 300 bulls originates from the EuroGenomics consortium. Since 2008, ~65 000 animals have been genotyped for selection by Labogena with the 50k chip. Bulls genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) were made official in June 2009. In 2010, the market share of the young bulls reached 30% and is expected to increase rapidly. Advertising actions have been undertaken to recommend a time-restricted use of young bulls with a limited number of doses. In January 2011, genomic selection was opened to all farmers for females. Current developments focus on the extension of the method to a multi-breed context, to use all reference populations simultaneously in genomic evaluation.


1996 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Rodriguez ◽  
M. Toro ◽  
L. Silió

AbstractData from 4150 Landrace pigs tested during the period 1989-94 for backfat thickness and age at 100 kg in an open selection nucleus were analysed with the standard restricted maximum likelihood/best linear unbiased prediction method and with a Bayesian approach based on the marginal posterior distributions of parameters of interest achieved via Gibbs sampling. Breeding values and fixed effects were sampled from normal distributions and (co)variance components from inverted Wishart distributions. The Bayesian analysis indicated that the selection was effective for both traits. Assuming flat priors for the (co)variance components, the posterior means of the annual rates of response to selection for both traits were −0·473 days and −0·212 mm. The influence of informative priors constructed from (co)variances estimated in the French Landrace breed on inferences about genetic and common environmental parameters, genetic group effects and total and annual responses was also examined.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document