Literature DB >> 28359261

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

Matti Taskinen1, Esa A Mäntysaari2, Ismo Strandén2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) evaluation combines relationship information from pedigree and genomic marker data. The inclusion of the genomic information into mixed model equations requires the inverse of the combined relationship matrix [Formula: see text], which has a dense matrix block for genotyped animals.
METHODS: To avoid inversion of dense matrices, single-step genomic BLUP can be transformed to single-step single nucleotide polymorphism BLUP (SNP-BLUP) which have observed and imputed marker coefficients. Simple block LDL type decompositions of the single-step relationship matrix [Formula: see text] were derived to obtain different types of linearly equivalent single-step genomic mixed model equations with different sets of reparametrized random effects. For non-genotyped animals, the imputed marker coefficient terms in the single-step SNP-BLUP were calculated on-the-fly during the iterative solution using sparse matrix decompositions without storing the imputed genotypes. Residual polygenic effects were added to genotyped animals and transmitted to non-genotyped animals using relationship coefficients that are similar to imputed genotypes. The relationships were further orthogonalized to improve convergence of iterative methods.
RESULTS: All presented single-step SNP-BLUP models can be solved efficiently using iterative methods that rely on iteration on data and sparse matrix approaches. The efficiency, accuracy and iteration convergence of the derived mixed model equations were tested with a small dataset that included 73,579 animals of which 2885 were genotyped with 37,526 SNPs.
CONCLUSIONS: Inversion of the large and dense genomic relationship matrix was avoided in single-step evaluation by using fully orthogonalized single-step SNP-BLUP formulations. The number of iterations until convergence was smaller in single-step SNP-BLUP formulations than in the original single-step GBLUP when heritability was low, but increased above that of the original single-step when heritability was high.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28359261      PMCID: PMC5374736          DOI: 10.1186/s12711-017-0310-9

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


  20 in total

1.  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

2.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

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

3.  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

4.  Multiple-trait genomic evaluation of linear type traits using genomic and phenotypic data in US Holsteins.

Authors:  S Tsuruta; I Misztal; I Aguilar; T J Lawlor
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.034

5.  Computational strategies for national integration of phenotypic, genomic, and pedigree data in a single-step best linear unbiased prediction.

Authors:  A Legarra; V Ducrocq
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.034

6.  Comparison on genomic predictions using three GBLUP methods and two single-step blending methods in the Nordic Holstein population.

Authors:  Hongding Gao; Ole F Christensen; Per Madsen; Ulrik S Nielsen; Yuan Zhang; Mogens S Lund; Guosheng Su
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  Allele coding in genomic evaluation.

Authors:  Ismo Strandén; Ole F Christensen
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2011-06-26       Impact factor: 4.297

8.  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

9.  A function accounting for training set size and marker density to model the average accuracy of genomic prediction.

Authors:  Malena Erbe; Birgit Gredler; Franz Reinhold Seefried; Beat Bapst; Henner Simianer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped.

Authors:  Ole F Christensen; Mogens S Lund
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 4.297

View more
  9 in total

1.  Efficient single-step genomic evaluation for a multibreed beef cattle population having many genotyped animals.

Authors:  E A Mäntysaari; R D Evans; I Strandén
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Computational strategies for the preconditioned conjugate gradient method applied to ssSNPBLUP, with an application to a multivariate maternal model.

Authors:  Jeremie Vandenplas; Herwin Eding; Maarten Bosmans; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 4.297

3.  Assessment of sire contribution and breed-of-origin of alleles in a three-way crossbred broiler dataset.

Authors:  Mario P L Calus; Jérémie Vandenplas; Ina Hulsegge; Randy Borg; John M Henshall; Rachel Hawken
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Single-step genomic BLUP with genetic groups and automatic adjustment for allele coding.

Authors:  Ismo Strandén; Gert P Aamand; Esa A Mäntysaari
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 5.100

5.  Deflated preconditioned conjugate gradient method for solving single-step BLUP models efficiently.

Authors:  Jérémie Vandenplas; Herwin Eding; Mario P L Calus; Cornelis Vuik
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2018-11-03       Impact factor: 4.297

6.  More animals than markers: a study into the application of the single step T-BLUP model in large-scale multi-trait Australian Angus beef cattle genetic evaluation.

Authors:  Vinzent Boerner; David J Johnston
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2019-10-16       Impact factor: 4.297

7.  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

8.  Efficient Estimation of Marker Effects in Plant Breeding.

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

9.  Convergence behavior of single-step GBLUP and SNPBLUP for different termination criteria.

Authors:  Jeremie Vandenplas; Mario P L Calus; Herwin Eding; Mathijs van Pelt; Rob Bergsma; Cornelis Vuik
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 4.297

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.