Literature DB >> 19820059

Genomic prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fifty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes.

K Kizilkaya1, R L Fernando, D J Garrick.   

Abstract

Genomic prediction involves characterization of chromosome fragments in a training population to predict merit. Confidence in the predictions relies on their evaluation in a validation population. Many commercial animals are multibreed (MB) or crossbred, but seedstock populations tend to be purebred (PB). Training in MB allows selection of PB for crossbred performance. Training in PB to predict MB performance quantifies the potential for across-breed genomic prediction. Efficiency of genomic selection was evaluated for a trait with heritability 0.5 simulated using actual SNP genotypes. The PB population had 1,086 Angus animals, and the MB population had 924 individuals from 8 sire breeds. Phenotypic values were simulated for scenarios including 50, 100, 250, or 500 additive QTL randomly selected from 50K SNP panels. Panels containing various numbers of SNP, including or excluding the QTL, were used in the analysis. A Bayesian model averaging method was used to simultaneously estimate the effects of all markers on the panels in MB (or PB) training populations. Estimated effects were utilized to predict genomic merit of animals in PB (or MB) validation populations. Correlations between predicted and simulated genomic merit in the validation population was used to reflect predictive ability. Panels that included QTL were able to account for 50% or more of the within-breed genetic variance when the trait was influenced by 50 QTL. The predictive power eroded as the number of QTL increased. Panels that composed the QTL and no other markers were able to account for 50% or more genetic variance even with 500 QTL. Panels that included genomic markers as well as QTL had less predictive power as the number of markers on the panel was increased. Panels that excluded the QTL and relied on markers in linkage disequilibrium (LD) to predict QTL effects performed more poorly than marker panels with QTL. Real-life situations with 50K panels that excluded the QTL could account for no more than 20% genetic variation for 50 QTL and less than 10% for 500 QTL. The difference between panels that included and excluded QTL indicates that the predictive ability of existing panels is limited by their LD. Training in PB to predict MB tended to be more predictive than training in MB to predict PB due to greater average levels of LD in PB than in MB populations. Improved across breed prediction of genomic merit will require panels with more than 50,000 markers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19820059     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2009-2064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  78 in total

1.  The impact of clustering methods for cross-validation, choice of phenotypes, and genotyping strategies on the accuracy of genomic predictions.

Authors:  Johnna L Baller; Jeremy T Howard; Stephen D Kachman; Matthew L Spangler
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  Genomic prediction in animals and plants: simulation of data, validation, reporting, and benchmarking.

Authors:  Hans D Daetwyler; Mario P L Calus; Ricardo Pong-Wong; Gustavo de Los Campos; John M Hickey
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 3.  The nature, scope and impact of genomic prediction in beef cattle in the United States.

Authors:  Dorian J Garrick
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2011-05-15       Impact factor: 4.297

4.  Genomic predictions in purebreds with a multibreed genomic relationship matrix1.

Authors:  Yvette Steyn; Daniela A L Lourenco; Ignacy Misztal
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Comparing genomic prediction accuracy from purebred, crossbred and combined purebred and crossbred reference populations in sheep.

Authors:  Nasir Moghaddar; Andrew A Swan; Julius H J van der Werf
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 4.297

6.  Large-effect pleiotropic or closely linked QTL segregate within and across ten US cattle breeds.

Authors:  Mahdi Saatchi; Robert D Schnabel; Jeremy F Taylor; Dorian J Garrick
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 3.969

7.  Genome-wide association study and genomic predictions for exterior traits in Yorkshire pigs1.

Authors:  Jungjae Lee; SeokHyun Lee; Jong-Eun Park; Sung-Ho Moon; Sung-Woon Choi; Gwang-Woong Go; Dajeong Lim; Jun-Mo Kim
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Dynamics of long-term genomic selection.

Authors:  Jean-Luc Jannink
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 4.297

9.  Efficiency of genomic selection using Bayesian multi-marker models for traits selected to reflect a wide range of heritabilities and frequencies of detected quantitative traits loci in mice.

Authors:  Dagmar N R G Kapell; Daniel Sorensen; Guosheng Su; Luc L G Janss; Cheryl J Ashworth; Rainer Roehe
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 2.797

10.  Genomic Prediction of Average Daily Gain, Back-Fat Thickness, and Loin Muscle Depth Using Different Genomic Tools in Canadian Swine Populations.

Authors:  Siavash Salek Ardestani; Mohsen Jafarikia; Mehdi Sargolzaei; Brian Sullivan; Younes Miar
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 4.599

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.