Literature DB >> 23038744

Components of the accuracy of genomic prediction in a multi-breed sheep population.

H D Daetwyler1, K E Kemper, J H J van der Werf, B J Hayes.   

Abstract

In genome-wide association studies, failure to remove variation due to population structure results in spurious associations. In contrast, for predictions of future phenotypes or estimated breeding values from dense SNP data, exploiting population structure arising from relatedness can actually increase the accuracy of prediction in some cases, for example, when the selection candidates are offspring of the reference population where the prediction equation was derived. In populations with large effective population size or with multiple breeds and strains, it has not been demonstrated whether and when accounting for or removing variation due to population structure will affect the accuracy of genomic prediction. Our aim in this study was to determine whether accounting for population structure would increase the accuracy of genomic predictions, both within and across breeds. First, we have attempted to decompose the accuracy of genomic prediction into contributions from population structure or linkage disequilibrium (LD) between markers and QTL using a diverse multi-breed sheep (Ovis aries) data set, genotyped for 48,640 SNP. We demonstrate that SNP from a single chromosome can achieve up to 86% of the accuracy for genomic predictions using all SNP. This result suggests that most of the prediction accuracy is due to population structure, because a single chromosome is expected to capture relationships but is unlikely to contain all QTL. We then explored principal component analysis (PCA) as an approach to disentangle the respective contributions of population structure and LD between SNP and QTL to the accuracy of genomic predictions. Results showed that fitting an increasing number of principle components (PC; as covariates) decreased within breed accuracy until a lower plateau was reached. We speculate that this plateau is a measure of the accuracy due to LD. In conclusion, a large proportion of the accuracy for genomic predictions in our data was due to variation associated with population structure. Surprisingly, accounting for this structure generally decreased the accuracy of across breed genomic predictions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23038744     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2011-4557

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


  48 in total

Review 1.  Applications of population genetics to animal breeding, from wright, fisher and lush to genomic prediction.

Authors:  William G Hill
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.562

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.  Toward genomic prediction from whole-genome sequence data: impact of sequencing design on genotype imputation and accuracy of predictions.

Authors:  T Druet; I M Macleod; B J Hayes
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2013-04-03       Impact factor: 3.821

4.  Factors affecting GEBV accuracy with single-step Bayesian models.

Authors:  Lei Zhou; Raphael Mrode; Shengli Zhang; Qin Zhang; Bugao Li; Jian-Feng Liu
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 3.821

5.  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

6.  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

7.  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

8.  Genomic prediction ability for yield-related traits in German winter barley elite material.

Authors:  Patrick Thorwarth; Jutta Ahlemeyer; Anne-Marie Bochard; Kerstin Krumnacker; Hubert Blümel; Eberhard Laubach; Nadine Knöchel; László Cselényi; Frank Ordon; Karl J Schmid
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 5.699

9.  Accuracy of pedigree and genomic predictions of carcass and novel meat quality traits in multi-breed sheep data assessed by cross-validation.

Authors:  Hans D Daetwyler; Andrew A Swan; Julius H J van der Werf; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2012-11-12       Impact factor: 4.297

10.  The effect of using genealogy-based haplotypes for genomic prediction.

Authors:  Vahid Edriss; Rohan L Fernando; Guosheng Su; Mogens S Lund; Bernt Guldbrandtsen
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 4.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.