Literature DB >> 17881705

Breeding value estimation for fat percentage using dense markers on Bos taurus autosome 14.

A P W de Roos1, C Schrooten, E Mullaart, M P L Calus, R F Veerkamp.   

Abstract

Prediction of breeding values using whole-genome dense marker maps for genomic selection has become feasible with the advances in DNA chip technology and the discovery of thousands of single nucleotide polymorphisms in genome-sequencing projects. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of predicted breeding values from genomic selection (GS), selection without genetic marker information (BLUP), and gene-assisted selection (GEN) on real dairy cattle data for 1 chromosome. Estimated breeding values of 1,300 bulls for fat percentage, based on daughter performance records, were obtained from the national genetic evaluation and used as phenotypic data. All bulls were genotyped for 32 genetic markers on chromosome 14, of which 1 marker was the causative mutation in a gene with a large effect on fat percentage. In GS, the data were analyzed with a multiple quantitative trait loci (QTL) model with haplotype effects for each marker bracket and a polygenic effect. Identical-by-descent probabilities based on linkage and linkage disequilibrium information were used to model the covariances between haplotypes. A Bayesian method using Gibbs sampling was used to predict the presence of a putative QTL and the effects of the haplotypes in each marker bracket. In BLUP, the haplotype effects were removed from the model, whereas in GEN, the haplotype effects were replaced by the effect of the genotype at the known causative mutation. The breeding values from the national genetic evaluation were treated as true breeding values because of their high accuracy and were used to compute the accuracy of prediction for GS, BLUP, and GEN. The allele substitution effect for the causative mutation, obtained from GEN, was 0.35% fat. The accuracy of the predicted breeding values for GS (0.75) was as high as for GEN (0.75) and higher than for BLUP (0.51). When some markers close to the QTL were omitted from the model, the accuracy of prediction was only slightly lower, around 0.72. The removal of all markers within 8 cM from the QTL reduced the accuracy to 0.64, which was still much higher than BLUP. It is concluded that, when applied to 1 chromosome and if genetic markers close to the QTL are available, the presented model for GS is as accurate as GEN.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17881705     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2007-0158

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  8 in total

1.  Modeling of identity-by-descent processes along a chromosome between haplotypes and their genotyped ancestors.

Authors:  Tom Druet; Frederic Paul Farnir
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Impact of reduced marker set estimation of genomic relationship matrices on genomic selection for feed efficiency in Angus cattle.

Authors:  Megan M Rolf; Jeremy F Taylor; Robert D Schnabel; Stephanie D McKay; Matthew C McClure; Sally L Northcutt; Monty S Kerley; Robert L Weaber
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 2.797

3.  Simulating a base population in honey bee for molecular genetic studies.

Authors:  Pooja Gupta; Tim Conrad; Andreas Spötter; Norbert Reinsch; Kaspar Bienefeld
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 4.297

4.  Estimating genomic breeding values from the QTL-MAS Workshop Data using a single SNP and haplotype/IBD approach.

Authors:  Mario P L Calus; Sander P W de Roos; Roel F Veerkamp
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2009-02-23

Review 5.  Genome assembly anchored QTL map of bovine chromosome 14.

Authors:  Tito A Wibowo; Charles T Gaskins; Ruth C Newberry; Gary H Thorgaard; Jennifer J Michal; Zhihua Jiang
Journal:  Int J Biol Sci       Date:  2008-11-12       Impact factor: 6.580

6.  Comparison of Bayesian models to estimate direct genomic values in multi-breed commercial beef cattle.

Authors:  Megan M Rolf; Dorian J Garrick; Tara Fountain; Holly R Ramey; Robert L Weaber; Jared E Decker; E John Pollak; Robert D Schnabel; Jeremy F Taylor
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Application of imputation methods to genomic selection in Chinese Holstein cattle.

Authors:  Ziqing Weng; Zhe Zhang; Xiangdong Ding; Weixuan Fu; Peipei Ma; Chonglong Wang; Qin Zhang
Journal:  J Anim Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2012-02-29

8.  Pre-selection of most significant SNPS for the estimation of genomic breeding values.

Authors:  Nicolò P P Macciotta; Giustino Gaspa; Roberto Steri; Camillo Pieramati; Paolo Carnier; Corrado Dimauro
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2009-02-23
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.