Literature DB >> 22192218

Reliability of direct genomic values for animals with different relationships within and to the reference population.

M Pszczola1, T Strabel, H A Mulder, M P L Calus.   

Abstract

Accuracy of genomic selection depends on the accuracy of prediction of single nucleotide polymorphism effects and the proportion of genetic variance explained by markers. Design of the reference population with respect to its family structure may influence the accuracy of genomic selection. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of various relationship levels within the reference population and different level of relationship of evaluated animals to the reference population on the reliability of direct genomic breeding values (DGV). The DGV reliabilities, expressed as squared correlation between estimated and true breeding value, were calculated for evaluated animals at 3 heritability levels. To emulate a trait that is difficult or expensive to measure, such as methane emission, reference populations were kept small and consisted of females with own performance records. A population reflecting a dairy cattle population structure was simulated. Four chosen reference populations consisted of all females available in the first genotyped generation. They consisted of highly (HR), moderately (MR), or lowly (LR) related animals, by selecting paternal half-sib families of decreasing size, or consisted of randomly chosen animals (RND). Of those 4 reference populations, RND had the lowest average relationship. Three sets of evaluated animals were chosen from 3 consecutive generations of genotyped animals, starting from the same generation as the reference population. Reliabilities of DGV predictions were calculated deterministically using selection index theory. The randomly chosen reference population had the lowest average relationship within the reference population. Average reliabilities increased when average relationship within the reference population decreased and the highest average reliabilities were achieved for RND (e.g., from 0.53 in HR to 0.61 in RND for a heritability of 0.30). A higher relationship to the reference population resulted in higher reliability values. At the average squared relationship of evaluated animals to the reference population of 0.005, reliabilities were, on average, 0.49 (HR) and 0.63 (RND) for a heritability of 0.30; 0.20 (HR) and 0.27 (RND) for a heritability of 0.05; and 0.07 (HR) and 0.09 (RND) for a heritability of 0.01. Substantial decrease in the reliability was observed when the number of generations to the reference population increased [e.g., for heritability of 0.30, the decrease from evaluated set I (chosen from the same generation as the reference population) to II (one generation younger than the reference population) was 0.04 for HR, and 0.07 for RND]. In this study, the importance of the design of a reference population consisting of cows was shown and optimal designs of the reference population for genomic prediction were suggested.
Copyright © 2012 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22192218     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2011-4338

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


  87 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

3.  The effect of linkage disequilibrium and family relationships on the reliability of genomic prediction.

Authors:  Yvonne C J Wientjes; Roel F Veerkamp; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2012-12-24       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Genomic selection and genetic gain for nut yield in an Australian macadamia breeding population.

Authors:  Katie M O'Connor; Ben J Hayes; Craig M Hardner; Mobashwer Alam; Robert J Henry; Bruce L Topp
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 3.969

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.  Leveraging genomic prediction to scan germplasm collection for crop improvement.

Authors:  Leonardo de Azevedo Peixoto; Tara C Moellers; Jiaoping Zhang; Aaron J Lorenz; Leonardo L Bhering; William D Beavis; Asheesh K Singh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  A comparison of principal component regression and genomic REML for genomic prediction across populations.

Authors:  Christos Dadousis; Roel F Veerkamp; Bjørg Heringstad; Marcin Pszczola; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 4.297

9.  Genomic prediction for rust resistance in diverse wheat landraces.

Authors:  Hans D Daetwyler; Urmil K Bansal; Harbans S Bariana; Matthew J Hayden; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 5.699

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.