Literature DB >> 27869042

Invited review: efficient computation strategies in genomic selection.

I Misztal1, A Legarra2.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study is review and evaluation of computing methods used in genomic selection for animal breeding. Commonly used models include SNP BLUP with extensions (BayesA, etc), genomic BLUP (GBLUP) and single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP). These models are applied for genomewide association studies (GWAS), genomic prediction and parameter estimation. Solving methods include finite Cholesky decomposition possibly with a sparse implementation, and iterative Gauss-Seidel (GS) or preconditioned conjugate gradient (PCG), the last two methods possibly with iteration on data. Details are provided that can drastically decrease some computations. For SNP BLUP especially with sampling and large number of SNP, the only choice is GS with iteration on data and adjustment of residuals. If only solutions are required, PCG by iteration on data is a clear choice. A genomic relationship matrix (GRM) has limited dimensionality due to small effective population size, resulting in infinite number of generalized inverses of GRM for large genotyped populations. A specific inverse called APY requires only a small fraction of GRM, is sparse and can be computed and stored at a low cost for millions of animals. With APY inverse and PCG iteration, GBLUP and ssGBLUP can be applied to any population. Both tools can be applied to GWAS. When the system of equations is sparse but contains dense blocks, a recently developed package for sparse Cholesky decomposition and sparse inversion called YAMS has greatly improved performance over packages where such blocks were treated as sparse. With YAMS, GREML and possibly single-step GREML can be applied to populations with >50 000 genotyped animals. From a computational perspective, genomic selection is becoming a mature methodology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  REML; genomic relationship matrix; genomic selection; inverse; single-step

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27869042     DOI: 10.1017/S1751731116002366

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Animal        ISSN: 1751-7311            Impact factor:   3.240


  7 in total

1.  Incorporating Gene Annotation into Genomic Prediction of Complex Phenotypes.

Authors:  Ning Gao; Johannes W R Martini; Zhe Zhang; Xiaolong Yuan; Hao Zhang; Henner Simianer; Jiaqi Li
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Genomic Prediction of Complex Traits in Animal Breeding with Long Breeding History, the Dairy Cattle Case.

Authors:  Joel Ira Weller
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

3.  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

4.  Estimating variance components in population scale family trees.

Authors:  Tal Shor; Iris Kalka; Dan Geiger; Yaniv Erlich; Omer Weissbrod
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 5.917

5.  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

6.  Efficient Estimation of Marker Effects in Plant Breeding.

Authors:  Alencar Xavier
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 3.154

Review 7.  Genomic Analysis, Progress and Future Perspectives in Dairy Cattle Selection: A Review.

Authors:  Miguel A Gutierrez-Reinoso; Pedro M Aponte; Manuel Garcia-Herreros
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 3.231

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.