Literature DB >> 25928875

Genomic prediction of breeding values using previously estimated SNP variances.

Mario Pl Calus1, Chris Schrooten2, Roel F Veerkamp3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Genomic prediction requires estimation of variances of effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which is computationally demanding, and uses these variances for prediction. We have developed models with separate estimation of SNP variances, which can be applied infrequently, and genomic prediction, which can be applied routinely.
METHODS: SNP variances were estimated with Bayes Stochastic Search Variable Selection (BSSVS) and BayesC. Genome-enhanced breeding values (GEBV) were estimated with RR-BLUP (ridge regression best linear unbiased prediction), using either variances obtained from BSSVS (BLUP-SSVS) or BayesC (BLUP-C), or assuming equal variances for each SNP. Datasets used to estimate SNP variances comprised (1) all animals, (2) 50% random animals (RAN50), (3) 50% best animals (TOP50), or (4) 50% worst animals (BOT50). Traits analysed were protein yield, udder depth, somatic cell score, interval between first and last insemination, direct longevity, and longevity including information from predictors.
RESULTS: BLUP-SSVS and BLUP-C yielded similar GEBV as the equivalent Bayesian models that simultaneously estimated SNP variances. Reliabilities of these GEBV were consistently higher than from RR-BLUP, although only significantly for direct longevity. Across scenarios that used data subsets to estimate GEBV, observed reliabilities were generally higher for TOP50 than for RAN50, and much higher than for BOT50. Reliabilities of TOP50 were higher because the training data contained more ancestors of selection candidates. Using estimated SNP variances based on random or non-random subsets of the data, while using all data to estimate GEBV, did not affect reliabilities of the BLUP models. A convergence criterion of 10(-8) instead of 10(-10) for BLUP models yielded similar GEBV, while the required number of iterations decreased by 71 to 90%. Including a separate polygenic effect consistently improved reliabilities of the GEBV, but also substantially increased the required number of iterations to reach convergence with RR-BLUP. SNP variances converged faster for BayesC than for BSSVS.
CONCLUSIONS: Combining Bayesian variable selection models to re-estimate SNP variances and BLUP models that use those SNP variances, yields GEBV that are similar to those from full Bayesian models. Moreover, these combined models yield predictions with higher reliability and less bias than the commonly used RR-BLUP model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25928875      PMCID: PMC4176585          DOI: 10.1186/s12711-014-0052-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Sel Evol        ISSN: 0999-193X            Impact factor:   4.297


  29 in total

1.  Solving large test-day models by iteration on data and preconditioned conjugate gradient.

Authors:  M Lidauer; I Strandén; E A Mäntysaari; J Pösö; A Kettunen
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.034

2.  Solving large mixed linear models using preconditioned conjugate gradient iteration.

Authors:  I Strandén; M Lidauer
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  Accuracy of genomic selection using different methods to define haplotypes.

Authors:  M P L Calus; T H E Meuwissen; A P W de Roos; R F Veerkamp
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

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

5.  Accuracy of genomic selection using stochastic search variable selection in Australian Holstein Friesian dairy cattle.

Authors:  Klara L Verbyla; Ben J Hayes; Philip J Bowman; Michael E Goddard
Journal:  Genet Res (Camb)       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.588

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

Authors:  M Pszczola; T Strabel; H A Mulder; M P L Calus
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.034

7.  Genotyping strategies for genomic selection in small dairy cattle populations.

Authors:  J A Jiménez-Montero; O González-Recio; R Alenda
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  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

9.  Accounting for genomic pre-selection in national BLUP evaluations in dairy cattle.

Authors:  Clotilde Patry; Vincent Ducrocq
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 4.297

10.  Right-hand-side updating for fast computing of genomic breeding values.

Authors:  Mario P L Calus
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 4.297

View more
  6 in total

1.  Efficient weighting methods for genomic best linear-unbiased prediction (BLUP) adapted to the genetic architectures of quantitative traits.

Authors:  Duanyang Ren; Lixia An; Baojun Li; Liying Qiao; Wenzhong Liu
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2020-09-26       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  Comparison of alternative approaches to single-trait genomic prediction using genotyped and non-genotyped Hanwoo beef cattle.

Authors:  Joonho Lee; Hao Cheng; Dorian Garrick; Bruce Golden; Jack Dekkers; Kyungdo Park; Deukhwan Lee; Rohan Fernando
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 4.297

3.  Genomic Prediction Using Multi-trait Weighted GBLUP Accounting for Heterogeneous Variances and Covariances Across the Genome.

Authors:  Emre Karaman; Mogens S Lund; Mahlet T Anche; Luc Janss; Guosheng Su
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 3.154

4.  Multi-trait single-step genomic prediction accounting for heterogeneous (co)variances over the genome.

Authors:  Emre Karaman; Mogens S Lund; Guosheng Su
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 3.821

5.  Genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle.

Authors:  Rianne van Binsbergen; Mario P L Calus; Marco C A M Bink; Fred A van Eeuwijk; Chris Schrooten; Roel F Veerkamp
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 4.297

6.  Performances of Adaptive MultiBLUP, Bayesian regressions, and weighted-GBLUP approaches for genomic predictions in Belgian Blue beef cattle.

Authors:  José Luis Gualdrón Duarte; Ann-Stephan Gori; Xavier Hubin; Daniela Lourenco; Carole Charlier; Ignacy Misztal; Tom Druet
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.969

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.