Literature DB >> 18096959

Technical note: Computing strategies in genome-wide selection.

A Legarra1, I Misztal.   

Abstract

Genome-wide genetic evaluation might involve the computation of BLUP-like estimations, potentially including thousands of covariates (i.e., single-nucleotide polymorphism markers) for each record. This implies dense Henderson's mixed-model equations and considerable computing resources in time and storage, even for a few thousand records. Possible computing options include the type of storage and the solving algorithm. This work evaluated several computing options, including half-stored Cholesky decomposition, Gauss-Seidel, and 3 matrix-free strategies: Gauss-Seidel, Gauss-Seidel with residuals update, and preconditioned conjugate gradients. Matrix-free Gauss-Seidel with residuals update adjusts the residuals after computing the solution for each effect. This avoids adjusting the left-hand side of the equations by all other effects at every step of the algorithm and saves considerable computing time. Any Gauss-Seidel algorithm can easily be extended for variance component estimation by Markov chain-Monte Carlo. Let m and n be the number of records and markers, respectively. Computing time for Cholesky decomposition is proportional to n3. Computing times per round are proportional to mn2 in matrix-free Gauss-Seidel, to n2 for half-stored Gauss-Seidel, and to n and m for the rest of the algorithms. Algorithms were tested on a real mouse data set, which included 1,928 records and 10,946 single-nucleotide polymorphism markers. Computing times were in the order of a few minutes for Gauss-Seidel with residuals update and preconditioned conjugate gradients, more than 1 h for half-stored Gauss-Seidel, 2 h for Cholesky decomposition, and 4 d for matrix-free Gauss-Seidel. Preconditioned conjugate gradients was the fastest. Gauss-Seidel with residuals update would be the method of choice for variance component estimation as well as solving.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18096959     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2007-0403

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


  44 in total

1.  An efficient method to handle the 'large p, small n' problem for genomewide association studies using Haseman-Elston regression.

Authors:  Bujun Mei; Zhihua Wang
Journal:  J Genet       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.166

2.  Genomic prediction using an iterative conditional expectation algorithm for a fast BayesC-like model.

Authors:  Linsong Dong; Zhiyong Wang
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2018-06-11       Impact factor: 1.082

3.  DAIRRy-BLUP: a high-performance computing approach to genomic prediction.

Authors:  Arne De Coninck; Jan Fostier; Steven Maenhout; Bernard De Baets
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 4.  Walking through the statistical black boxes of plant breeding.

Authors:  Alencar Xavier; William M Muir; Bruce Craig; Katy Martin Rainey
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 5.699

5.  Genomic prediction based on data from three layer lines: a comparison between linear methods.

Authors:  Mario Pl Calus; Heyun Huang; Addie Vereijken; Jeroen Visscher; Jan Ten Napel; Jack J Windig
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 4.297

6.  Genomic prediction of breeding values using previously estimated SNP variances.

Authors:  Mario Pl Calus; Chris Schrooten; Roel F Veerkamp
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Accuracy of genomic selection models in a large population of open-pollinated families in white spruce.

Authors:  J Beaulieu; T Doerksen; S Clément; J MacKay; J Bousquet
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 3.821

8.  Fitting and validating the genomic evaluation model to Polish Holstein-Friesian cattle.

Authors:  Joanna Szyda; Andrzej Zarnecki; Tomasz Suchocki; Stanisław Kamiński
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Genomic breeding value prediction using three Bayesian methods and application to reduced density marker panels.

Authors:  Matthew A Cleveland; Selma Forni; Nader Deeb; Christian Maltecca
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2010-03-31

10.  A comparison of five methods to predict genomic breeding values of dairy bulls from genome-wide SNP markers.

Authors:  Gerhard Moser; Bruce Tier; Ron E Crump; Mehar S Khatkar; Herman W Raadsma
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2009-12-31       Impact factor: 4.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.