Literature DB >> 20479144

Graph-based data selection for the construction of genomic prediction models.

Steven Maenhout1, Bernard De Baets, Geert Haesaert.   

Abstract

Efficient genomic selection in animals or crops requires the accurate prediction of the agronomic performance of individuals from their high-density molecular marker profiles. Using a training data set that contains the genotypic and phenotypic information of a large number of individuals, each marker or marker allele is associated with an estimated effect on the trait under study. These estimated marker effects are subsequently used for making predictions on individuals for which no phenotypic records are available. As most plant and animal breeding programs are currently still phenotype driven, the continuously expanding collection of phenotypic records can only be used to construct a genomic prediction model if a dense molecular marker fingerprint is available for each phenotyped individual. However, as the genotyping budget is generally limited, the genomic prediction model can only be constructed using a subset of the tested individuals and possibly a genome-covering subset of the molecular markers. In this article, we demonstrate how an optimal selection of individuals can be made with respect to the quality of their available phenotypic data. We also demonstrate how the total number of molecular markers can be reduced while a maximum genome coverage is ensured. The third selection problem we tackle is specific to the construction of a genomic prediction model for a hybrid breeding program where only molecular marker fingerprints of the homozygous parents are available. We show how to identify the set of parental inbred lines of a predefined size that has produced the highest number of progeny. These three selection approaches are put into practice in a simulation study where we demonstrate how the trade-off between sample size and sample quality affects the prediction accuracy of genomic prediction models for hybrid maize.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20479144      PMCID: PMC2927770          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.110.116426

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  11 in total

1.  Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps.

Authors:  T H Meuwissen; B J Hayes; M E Goddard
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model.

Authors:  C R Henderson
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Planning incomplete block experiments when treatments are genetically related.

Authors:  Júlio S de S Bueno Filho; Steven G Gilmour
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  A unified mixed-model method for association mapping that accounts for multiple levels of relatedness.

Authors:  Jianming Yu; Gael Pressoir; William H Briggs; Irie Vroh Bi; Masanori Yamasaki; John F Doebley; Michael D McMullen; Brandon S Gaut; Dahlia M Nielsen; James B Holland; Stephen Kresovich; Edward S Buckler
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2005-12-25       Impact factor: 38.330

5.  Marker-based estimation of the coefficient of coancestry in hybrid breeding programmes.

Authors:  S Maenhout; B De Baets; G Haesaert
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 5.699

6.  Reproducing kernel hilbert spaces regression methods for genomic assisted prediction of quantitative traits.

Authors:  Daniel Gianola; Johannes B C H M van Kaam
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Prediction of maize single-cross hybrid performance: support vector machine regression versus best linear prediction.

Authors:  Steven Maenhout; Bernard De Baets; Geert Haesaert
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 5.699

8.  Considerations on genetic connectedness between management units under an animal model.

Authors:  B W Kennedy; D Trus
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 9.  Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges.

Authors:  B J Hayes; P J Bowman; A J Chamberlain; M E Goddard
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.034

10.  Support vector machine regression for the prediction of maize hybrid performance.

Authors:  S Maenhout; B De Baets; G Haesaert; E Van Bockstaele
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2007-09-06       Impact factor: 5.574

View more
  11 in total

1.  Beyond Genomic Prediction: Combining Different Types of omics Data Can Improve Prediction of Hybrid Performance in Maize.

Authors:  Tobias A Schrag; Matthias Westhues; Wolfgang Schipprack; Felix Seifert; Alexander Thiemann; Stefan Scholten; Albrecht E Melchinger
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Building a Calibration Set for Genomic Prediction, Characteristics to Be Considered, and Optimization Approaches.

Authors:  Simon Rio; Alain Charcosset; Tristan Mary-Huard; Laurence Moreau; Renaud Rincent
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

3.  Maximizing the reliability of genomic selection by optimizing the calibration set of reference individuals: comparison of methods in two diverse groups of maize inbreds (Zea mays L.).

Authors:  R Rincent; D Laloë; S Nicolas; T Altmann; D Brunel; P Revilla; V M Rodríguez; J Moreno-Gonzalez; A Melchinger; E Bauer; C-C Schoen; N Meyer; C Giauffret; C Bauland; P Jamin; J Laborde; H Monod; P Flament; A Charcosset; L Moreau
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2012-08-03       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Across-years prediction of hybrid performance in maize using genomics.

Authors:  Tobias A Schrag; Wolfgang Schipprack; Albrecht E Melchinger
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 5.699

Review 5.  Large-scale sequestration of atmospheric carbon via plant roots in natural and agricultural ecosystems: why and how.

Authors:  Douglas B Kell
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Training set optimization under population structure in genomic selection.

Authors:  Julio Isidro; Jean-Luc Jannink; Deniz Akdemir; Jesse Poland; Nicolas Heslot; Mark E Sorrells
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 5.699

7.  Predicting genomic selection efficiency to optimize calibration set and to assess prediction accuracy in highly structured populations.

Authors:  R Rincent; A Charcosset; L Moreau
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 5.699

Review 8.  Genomic Selection in Sugarcane: Current Status and Future Prospects.

Authors:  Channappa Mahadevaiah; Chinnaswamy Appunu; Karen Aitken; Giriyapura Shivalingamurthy Suresha; Palanisamy Vignesh; Huskur Kumaraswamy Mahadeva Swamy; Ramanathan Valarmathi; Govind Hemaprabha; Ganesh Alagarasan; Bakshi Ram
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 5.753

9.  Exploiting genomic knowledge in optimising molecular breeding programmes: algorithms from evolutionary computing.

Authors:  Steve O'Hagan; Joshua Knowles; Douglas B Kell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Genomic Relatedness Strengthens Genetic Connectedness Across Management Units.

Authors:  Haipeng Yu; Matthew L Spangler; Ronald M Lewis; Gota Morota
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 3.154

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.