Literature DB >> 25233989

The effects of demography and long-term selection on the accuracy of genomic prediction with sequence data.

Iona M MacLeod1, Ben J Hayes2, Michael E Goddard3.   

Abstract

The use of dense SNPs to predict the genetic value of an individual for a complex trait is often referred to as "genomic selection" in livestock and crops, but is also relevant to human genetics to predict, for example, complex genetic disease risk. The accuracy of prediction depends on the strength of linkage disequilibrium (LD) between SNPs and causal mutations. If sequence data were used instead of dense SNPs, accuracy should increase because causal mutations are present, but demographic history and long-term negative selection also influence accuracy. We therefore evaluated genomic prediction, using simulated sequence in two contrasting populations: one reducing from an ancestrally large effective population size (Ne) to a small one, with high LD common in domestic livestock, while the second had a large constant-sized Ne with low LD similar to that in some human or outbred plant populations. There were two scenarios in each population; causal variants were either neutral or under long-term negative selection. For large Ne, sequence data led to a 22% increase in accuracy relative to ∼600K SNP chip data with a Bayesian analysis and a more modest advantage with a BLUP analysis. This advantage increased when causal variants were influenced by negative selection, and accuracy persisted when 10 generations separated reference and validation populations. However, in the reducing Ne population, there was little advantage for sequence even with negative selection. This study demonstrates the joint influence of demography and selection on accuracy of prediction and improves our understanding of how best to exploit sequence for genomic prediction.
Copyright © 2014 by the Genetics Society of America.

Entities:  

Keywords:  GenPred; genomic selection; high-density SNP; shared data resource; whole-genome sequence

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25233989      PMCID: PMC4256779          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.114.168344

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


  58 in total

1.  Calibrating a coalescent simulation of human genome sequence variation.

Authors:  Stephen F Schaffner; Catherine Foo; Stacey Gabriel; David Reich; Mark J Daly; David Altshuler
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 9.043

2.  Allele frequencies and the r2 measure of linkage disequilibrium: impact on design and interpretation of association studies.

Authors:  Naomi R Wray
Journal:  Twin Res Hum Genet       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.587

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.  The effect of deleterious mutations on neutral molecular variation.

Authors:  B Charlesworth; M T Morgan; D Charlesworth
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Interrogating multiple aspects of variation in a full resequencing data set to infer human population size changes.

Authors:  Benjamin F Voight; Alison M Adams; Linda A Frisse; Yudong Qian; Richard R Hudson; Anna Di Rienzo
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-12-13       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Whole-genome sequencing of 234 bulls facilitates mapping of monogenic and complex traits in cattle.

Authors:  Hans D Daetwyler; Aurélien Capitan; Hubert Pausch; Paul Stothard; Rianne van Binsbergen; Rasmus F Brøndum; Xiaoping Liao; Anis Djari; Sabrina C Rodriguez; Cécile Grohs; Diane Esquerré; Olivier Bouchez; Marie-Noëlle Rossignol; Christophe Klopp; Dominique Rocha; Sébastien Fritz; André Eggen; Phil J Bowman; David Coote; Amanda J Chamberlain; Charlotte Anderson; Curt P VanTassell; Ina Hulsegge; Mike E Goddard; Bernt Guldbrandtsen; Mogens S Lund; Roel F Veerkamp; Didier A Boichard; Ruedi Fries; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2014-07-13       Impact factor: 38.330

7.  A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs.

Authors:  Kelly A Frazer; Dennis G Ballinger; David R Cox; David A Hinds; Laura L Stuve; Richard A Gibbs; John W Belmont; Andrew Boudreau; Paul Hardenbol; Suzanne M Leal; Shiran Pasternak; David A Wheeler; Thomas D Willis; Fuli Yu; Huanming Yang; Changqing Zeng; Yang Gao; Haoran Hu; Weitao Hu; Chaohua Li; Wei Lin; Siqi Liu; Hao Pan; Xiaoli Tang; Jian Wang; Wei Wang; Jun Yu; Bo Zhang; Qingrun Zhang; Hongbin Zhao; Hui Zhao; Jun Zhou; Stacey B Gabriel; Rachel Barry; Brendan Blumenstiel; Amy Camargo; Matthew Defelice; Maura Faggart; Mary Goyette; Supriya Gupta; Jamie Moore; Huy Nguyen; Robert C Onofrio; Melissa Parkin; Jessica Roy; Erich Stahl; Ellen Winchester; Liuda Ziaugra; David Altshuler; Yan Shen; Zhijian Yao; Wei Huang; Xun Chu; Yungang He; Li Jin; Yangfan Liu; Yayun Shen; Weiwei Sun; Haifeng Wang; Yi Wang; Ying Wang; Xiaoyan Xiong; Liang Xu; Mary M Y Waye; Stephen K W Tsui; Hong Xue; J Tze-Fei Wong; Luana M Galver; Jian-Bing Fan; Kevin Gunderson; Sarah S Murray; Arnold R Oliphant; Mark S Chee; Alexandre Montpetit; Fanny Chagnon; Vincent Ferretti; Martin Leboeuf; Jean-François Olivier; Michael S Phillips; Stéphanie Roumy; Clémentine Sallée; Andrei Verner; Thomas J Hudson; Pui-Yan Kwok; Dongmei Cai; Daniel C Koboldt; Raymond D Miller; Ludmila Pawlikowska; Patricia Taillon-Miller; Ming Xiao; Lap-Chee Tsui; William Mak; You Qiang Song; Paul K H Tam; Yusuke Nakamura; Takahisa Kawaguchi; Takuya Kitamoto; Takashi Morizono; Atsushi Nagashima; Yozo Ohnishi; Akihiro Sekine; Toshihiro Tanaka; Tatsuhiko Tsunoda; Panos Deloukas; Christine P Bird; Marcos Delgado; Emmanouil T Dermitzakis; Rhian Gwilliam; Sarah Hunt; Jonathan Morrison; Don Powell; Barbara E Stranger; Pamela Whittaker; David R Bentley; Mark J Daly; Paul I W de Bakker; Jeff Barrett; Yves R Chretien; Julian Maller; Steve McCarroll; Nick Patterson; Itsik Pe'er; Alkes Price; Shaun Purcell; Daniel J Richter; Pardis Sabeti; Richa Saxena; Stephen F Schaffner; Pak C Sham; Patrick Varilly; David Altshuler; Lincoln D Stein; Lalitha Krishnan; Albert Vernon Smith; Marcela K Tello-Ruiz; Gudmundur A Thorisson; Aravinda Chakravarti; Peter E Chen; David J Cutler; Carl S Kashuk; Shin Lin; Gonçalo R Abecasis; Weihua Guan; Yun Li; Heather M Munro; Zhaohui Steve Qin; Daryl J Thomas; Gilean McVean; Adam Auton; Leonardo Bottolo; Niall Cardin; Susana Eyheramendy; Colin Freeman; Jonathan Marchini; Simon Myers; Chris Spencer; Matthew Stephens; Peter Donnelly; Lon R Cardon; Geraldine Clarke; David M Evans; Andrew P Morris; Bruce S Weir; Tatsuhiko Tsunoda; James C Mullikin; Stephen T Sherry; Michael Feolo; Andrew Skol; Houcan Zhang; Changqing Zeng; Hui Zhao; Ichiro Matsuda; Yoshimitsu Fukushima; Darryl R Macer; Eiko Suda; Charles N Rotimi; Clement A Adebamowo; Ike Ajayi; Toyin Aniagwu; Patricia A Marshall; Chibuzor Nkwodimmah; Charmaine D M Royal; Mark F Leppert; Missy Dixon; Andy Peiffer; Renzong Qiu; Alastair Kent; Kazuto Kato; Norio Niikawa; Isaac F Adewole; Bartha M Knoppers; Morris W Foster; Ellen Wright Clayton; Jessica Watkin; Richard A Gibbs; John W Belmont; Donna Muzny; Lynne Nazareth; Erica Sodergren; George M Weinstock; David A Wheeler; Imtaz Yakub; Stacey B Gabriel; Robert C Onofrio; Daniel J Richter; Liuda Ziaugra; Bruce W Birren; Mark J Daly; David Altshuler; Richard K Wilson; Lucinda L Fulton; Jane Rogers; John Burton; Nigel P Carter; Christopher M Clee; Mark Griffiths; Matthew C Jones; Kirsten McLay; Robert W Plumb; Mark T Ross; Sarah K Sims; David L Willey; Zhu Chen; Hua Han; Le Kang; Martin Godbout; John C Wallenburg; Paul L'Archevêque; Guy Bellemare; Koji Saeki; Hongguang Wang; Daochang An; Hongbo Fu; Qing Li; Zhen Wang; Renwu Wang; Arthur L Holden; Lisa D Brooks; Jean E McEwen; Mark S Guyer; Vivian Ota Wang; Jane L Peterson; Michael Shi; Jack Spiegel; Lawrence M Sung; Lynn F Zacharia; Francis S Collins; Karen Kennedy; Ruth Jamieson; John Stewart
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2007-10-18       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 8.  The distribution of fitness effects of new mutations.

Authors:  Adam Eyre-Walker; Peter D Keightley
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  A common reference population from four European Holstein populations increases reliability of genomic predictions.

Authors:  Mogens S Lund; Adrianus P W de Roos; Alfred G de Vries; Tom Druet; Vincent Ducrocq; Sébastien Fritz; François Guillaume; Bernt Guldbrandtsen; Zenting Liu; Reinhard Reents; Chris Schrooten; Franz Seefried; Guosheng Su
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2011-12-12       Impact factor: 4.297

10.  Selection for complex traits leaves little or no classic signatures of selection.

Authors:  Kathryn E Kemper; Sarah J Saxton; Sunduimijid Bolormaa; Benjamin J Hayes; Michael E Goddard
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 3.969

View more
  36 in total

1.  Evaluating Sequence-Based Genomic Prediction with an Efficient New Simulator.

Authors:  Miguel Pérez-Enciso; Natalia Forneris; Gustavo de Los Campos; Andrés Legarra
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-12-02       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  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

Review 3.  Genetics of complex traits: prediction of phenotype, identification of causal polymorphisms and genetic architecture.

Authors:  M E Goddard; K E Kemper; I M MacLeod; A J Chamberlain; B J Hayes
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 5.349

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.  Holsteins are the genomic selection poster cows.

Authors:  Jeremy F Taylor; Kristen H Taylor; Jared E Decker
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Meuwissen et al. on Genomic Selection.

Authors:  Dirk-Jan de Koning
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Genomic Prediction Using LD-Based Haplotypes in Combined Pig Populations.

Authors:  Haoqiang Ye; Zipeng Zhang; Duanyang Ren; Xiaodian Cai; Qianghui Zhu; Xiangdong Ding; Hao Zhang; Zhe Zhang; Jiaqi Li
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 4.772

8.  The utility of genomic prediction models in evolutionary genetics.

Authors:  Suzanne E McGaugh; Aaron J Lorenz; Lex E Flagel
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 5.530

9.  A computationally efficient algorithm for genomic prediction using a Bayesian model.

Authors:  Tingting Wang; Yi-Ping Phoebe Chen; Michael E Goddard; Theo H E Meuwissen; Kathryn E Kemper; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 4.297

10.  Sequence- vs. chip-assisted genomic selection: accurate biological information is advised.

Authors:  Miguel Pérez-Enciso; Juan C Rincón; Andrés Legarra
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 4.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.