Literature DB >> 25873631

Ancestral Relationships Using Metafounders: Finite Ancestral Populations and Across Population Relationships.

Andres Legarra1, Ole F Christensen2, Zulma G Vitezica3, Ignacio Aguilar4, Ignacy Misztal5.   

Abstract

Recent use of genomic (marker-based) relationships shows that relationships exist within and across base population (breeds or lines). However, current treatment of pedigree relationships is unable to consider relationships within or across base populations, although such relationships must exist due to finite size of the ancestral population and connections between populations. This complicates the conciliation of both approaches and, in particular, combining pedigree with genomic relationships. We present a coherent theoretical framework to consider base population in pedigree relationships. We suggest a conceptual framework that considers each ancestral population as a finite-sized pool of gametes. This generates across-individual relationships and contrasts with the classical view which each population is considered as an infinite, unrelated pool. Several ancestral populations may be connected and therefore related. Each ancestral population can be represented as a "metafounder," a pseudo-individual included as founder of the pedigree and similar to an "unknown parent group." Metafounders have self- and across relationships according to a set of parameters, which measure ancestral relationships, i.e., homozygozities within populations and relationships across populations. These parameters can be estimated from existing pedigree and marker genotypes using maximum likelihood or a method based on summary statistics, for arbitrarily complex pedigrees. Equivalences of genetic variance and variance components between the classical and this new parameterization are shown. Segregation variance on crosses of populations is modeled. Efficient algorithms for computation of relationship matrices, their inverses, and inbreeding coefficients are presented. Use of metafounders leads to compatibility of genomic and pedigree relationship matrices and to simple computing algorithms. Examples and code are given.
Copyright © 2015 by the Genetics Society of America.

Keywords:  GenPred; base populations; genetic drift; marker genotypes; pedigree; relationships; shared data resource

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25873631      PMCID: PMC4492372          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.115.177014

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


  39 in total

1.  Identity-by-descent matrix decomposition using latent ancestral allele models.

Authors:  Cajo J F ter Braak; Martin P Boer; L Radu Totir; Christopher R Winkler; Oscar S Smith; Marco C A M Bink
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

Authors:  P M VanRaden
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  Covariance between relatives in multibreed populations: additive model.

Authors:  L L Lo; R L Fernando; M Grossman
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 5.699

4.  A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information.

Authors:  A Legarra; I Aguilar; I Misztal
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.034

5.  Genomic predictions for New Zealand dairy bulls and integration with national genetic evaluation.

Authors:  B L Harris; D L Johnson
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.034

6.  Application of genomic evaluation to dairy cattle in New Zealand.

Authors:  A M Winkelman; D L Johnson; B L Harris
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 4.034

7.  Within- and across-breed genomic predictions and genomic relationships for Western Pyrenees dairy sheep breeds Latxa, Manech, and Basco-Béarnaise.

Authors:  A Legarra; G Baloche; F Barillet; J M Astruc; C Soulas; X Aguerre; F Arrese; L Mintegi; M Lasarte; F Maeztu; I Beltrán de Heredia; E Ugarte
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 4.034

8.  Evolution of genetic structures of small populations.

Authors:  A Jacquard
Journal:  Soc Biol       Date:  1969-09

9.  An indirect approach to the extensive calculation of relationship coefficients.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Colleau
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.297

10.  Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations.

Authors:  Ben J Hayes; Phillip J Bowman; Amanda C Chamberlain; Klara Verbyla; Mike E Goddard
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 4.297

View more
  27 in total

1.  Genomic prediction for crossbred performance using metafounders.

Authors:  Elizabeth M van Grevenhof; Jérémie Vandenplas; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Including crossbred pigs in the genomic relationship matrix through utilization of both linkage disequilibrium and linkage analysis.

Authors:  M W Iversen; Ø Nordbø; E Gjerlaug-Enger; E Grindflek; M S Lopes; T H E Meuwissen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  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

4.  Single-step SNP-BLUP with on-the-fly imputed genotypes and residual polygenic effects.

Authors:  Matti Taskinen; Esa A Mäntysaari; Ismo Strandén
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 4.297

5.  Impact and utility of shallow pedigree using single-step genomic BLUP for prediction of unbiased genomic breeding values.

Authors:  G R Gowane; Rani Alex; Anupama Mukherjee; Vikas Vohra
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 1.893

6.  Comparison of models for missing pedigree in single-step genomic prediction.

Authors:  Yutaka Masuda; Shogo Tsuruta; Matias Bermann; Heather L Bradford; Ignacy Misztal
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Single-step genomic evaluation of Russian dairy cattle using internal and external information.

Authors:  Andrei A Kudinov; Esa A Mäntysaari; Timo J Pitkänen; Ekaterina I Saksa; Gert P Aamand; Pekka Uimari; Ismo Strandén
Journal:  J Anim Breed Genet       Date:  2021-11-28       Impact factor: 3.271

8.  Genetic evaluation for three-way crossbreeding.

Authors:  Ole F Christensen; Andres Legarra; Mogens S Lund; Guosheng Su
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 4.297

9.  Accounting for genetic differences among unknown parents in microevolutionary studies: how to include genetic groups in quantitative genetic animal models.

Authors:  Matthew E Wolak; Jane M Reid
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 5.091

10.  A fast indirect method to compute functions of genomic relationships concerning genotyped and ungenotyped individuals, for diversity management.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Colleau; Isabelle Palhière; Silvia T Rodríguez-Ramilo; Andres Legarra
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 4.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.