| Literature DB >> 28245804 |
Amy M Bell1, John M Henshall2, Laercio R Porto-Neto3, Sonja Dominik2, Russell McCulloch3, James Kijas3, Sigrid A Lehnert3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: DNA-based predictions for hard-to-measure production traits hold great promise for selective breeding programs. DNA pooling might provide a cheap genomic approach to use phenotype data from commercial flocks which are commonly group-mated with parentage unknown. This study on sheep explores if genomic breeding values for stud sires can be estimated from genomic relationships that were obtained from pooled DNA in combination with phenotypes from commercial progeny.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28245804 PMCID: PMC5331749 DOI: 10.1186/s12711-017-0303-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genet Sel Evol ISSN: 0999-193X Impact factor: 4.297
Description of phenotypic values for dag scores [11] and pool sizes (number of pools × number of individuals in the pool)
| Dag score | Description | Male pools | Female pools |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | No dags | 2 × 40 | 2 × 40 |
| 2 | Some dags around the breech area | 2 × 40 | 2 × 40 |
| 3 | Dags around the breech area, some dags reaching down the inner hind leg to above the hock | 2 × 40 | 2 × 40 |
| 4 | Dags around the breech area, reaching down the inner hind legs to the hock and extend out | 2 × 40 | 2 × 40 |
| 5 | Extensive dags around breech and extending down the hind legs to the pasterns, covering extensive amount of the hind legs | 2 × 40 | 2 × 33 |
Fig. 1Frequencies of the genomic relationships between a sires and other sires within the study and b sires and the pools within the study
Proportions of analyses that were significant at various levels for the observed data and for the data with phenotypes permuted
| Significance level | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.0005 | |
| Observed | 0.300 | 0.120 | 0.061 | 0.030* | 0.030* |
| Permuted | 0.049 | 0.011 | 0.005 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
* 0.0303 is one out of 33 sires
Fig. 2An example of the best versus the worst sire when a sire’s genomic contribution is regressed on the dag score phenotype. The best sire has the most negative slope, indicating a greater contribution to lower dag score phenotypes. The worst sire has the more positive slope, contributing more to higher dag score phenotypes
Fig. 3Relationship between sires’ genomic estimated breeding value (in dag score units) and the coefficient of the regression from sires’ genomic contribution on dag score