Literature DB >> 28522540

Orthogonal Estimates of Variances for Additive, Dominance, and Epistatic Effects in Populations.

Zulma G Vitezica1,2, Andrés Legarra2, Miguel A Toro3, Luis Varona4,5.   

Abstract

Genomic prediction methods based on multiple markers have potential to include nonadditive effects in prediction and analysis of complex traits. However, most developments assume a Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE). Statistical approaches for genomic selection that account for dominance and epistasis in a general context, without assuming HWE (e.g., crosses or homozygous lines), are therefore needed. Our method expands the natural and orthogonal interactions (NOIA) approach, which builds incidence matrices based on genotypic (not allelic) frequencies, to include genome-wide epistasis for an arbitrary number of interacting loci in a genomic evaluation context. This results in an orthogonal partition of the variances, which is not warranted otherwise. We also present the partition of variance as a function of genotypic values and frequencies following Cockerham's orthogonal contrast approach. Then we prove for the first time that, even not in HWE, the multiple-loci NOIA method is equivalent to construct epistatic genomic relationship matrices for higher-order interactions using Hadamard products of additive and dominant genomic orthogonal relationships. A standardization based on the trace of the relationship matrices is, however, needed. We illustrate these results with two simulated F1 (not in HWE) populations, either in linkage equilibrium (LE), or in linkage disequilibrium (LD) and divergent selection, and pure biological dominant pairwise epistasis. In the LE case, correct and orthogonal estimates of variances were obtained using NOIA genomic relationships but not if relationships were constructed assuming HWE. For the LD simulation, differences were smaller, due to the smaller deviation of the F1 from HWE. Wrongly assuming HWE to build genomic relationships and estimate variance components yields biased estimates, inflates the total genetic variance, and the estimates are not empirically orthogonal. The NOIA method to build genomic relationships, coupled with the use of Hadamard products for epistatic terms, allows the obtaining of correct estimates in populations either in HWE or not in HWE, and extends to any order of epistatic interactions.
Copyright © 2017 by the Genetics Society of America.

Keywords:  GenPred; NOIA approach; dominance; epistasis; genetic variance components; genomic models; genomic selection; shared data resource

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28522540      PMCID: PMC5500131          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.116.199406

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


  26 in total

1.  Modeling quantitative trait Loci and interpretation of models.

Authors:  Zhao-Bang Zeng; Tao Wang; Wei Zou
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-01-16       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  QMSim: a large-scale genome simulator for livestock.

Authors:  Mehdi Sargolzaei; Flavio S Schenkel
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-01-28       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

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

4.  Accuracy of Genomic Prediction in Synthetic Populations Depending on the Number of Parents, Relatedness, and Ancestral Linkage Disequilibrium.

Authors:  Pascal Schopp; Dominik Müller; Frank Technow; Albrecht E Melchinger
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  On the additive and dominant variance and covariance of individuals within the genomic selection scope.

Authors:  Zulma G Vitezica; Luis Varona; Andres Legarra
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Unraveling additive from nonadditive effects using genomic relationship matrices.

Authors:  Patricio R Muñoz; Marcio F R Resende; Salvador A Gezan; Marcos Deon Vilela Resende; Gustavo de Los Campos; Matias Kirst; Dudley Huber; Gary F Peter
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Influence of gene interaction on complex trait variation with multilocus models.

Authors:  Asko Mäki-Tanila; William G Hill
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 4.562

8.  A note on Fisher's 'average effect' and 'average excess'.

Authors:  D S Falconer
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 1.588

9.  Common SNPs explain a large proportion of the heritability for human height.

Authors:  Jian Yang; Beben Benyamin; Brian P McEvoy; Scott Gordon; Anjali K Henders; Dale R Nyholt; Pamela A Madden; Andrew C Heath; Nicholas G Martin; Grant W Montgomery; Michael E Goddard; Peter M Visscher
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2010-06-20       Impact factor: 38.330

10.  Including dominance effects in the genomic BLUP method for genomic evaluation.

Authors:  Motohide Nishio; Masahiro Satoh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  44 in total

1.  A new genomic prediction method with additive-dominance effects in the least-squares framework.

Authors:  Hailan Liu; Guo-Bo Chen
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  Homeologous Epistasis in Wheat: The Search for an Immortal Hybrid.

Authors:  Nicholas Santantonio; Jean-Luc Jannink; Mark Sorrells
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Efficient Algorithms for Calculating Epistatic Genomic Relationship Matrices.

Authors:  Yong Jiang; Jochen C Reif
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2020-09-24       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Genome-wide prediction for complex traits under the presence of dominance effects in simulated populations using GBLUP and machine learning methods.

Authors:  Anderson Antonio Carvalho Alves; Rebeka Magalhães da Costa; Tiago Bresolin; Gerardo Alves Fernandes Júnior; Rafael Espigolan; André Mauric Frossard Ribeiro; Roberto Carvalheiro; Lucia Galvão de Albuquerque
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Accounting for Group-Specific Allele Effects and Admixture in Genomic Predictions: Theory and Experimental Evaluation in Maize.

Authors:  Simon Rio; Laurence Moreau; Alain Charcosset; Tristan Mary-Huard
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Evaluation of nonadditive effects in yearling weight of tropical beef cattle.

Authors:  Fernanda S S Raidan; Laercio R Porto-Neto; Yutao Li; Sigrid A Lehnert; Zulma G Vitezica; Antonio Reverter
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Association analysis of loci implied in "buffering" epistasis.

Authors:  Antonio Reverter; Zulma G Vitezica; Marina Naval-Sánchez; John Henshall; Fernanda S S Raidan; Yutao Li; Karin Meyer; Nicholas J Hudson; Laercio R Porto-Neto; Andrés Legarra
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Genomic prediction with non-additive effects in beef cattle: stability of variance component and genetic effect estimates against population size.

Authors:  Akio Onogi; Toshio Watanabe; Atsushi Ogino; Kazuhito Kurogi; Kenji Togashi
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 3.969

9.  Modeling copy number variation in the genomic prediction of maize hybrids.

Authors:  Danilo Hottis Lyra; Giovanni Galli; Filipe Couto Alves; Ítalo Stefanine Correia Granato; Miriam Suzane Vidotti; Massaine Bandeira E Sousa; Júlia Silva Morosini; José Crossa; Roberto Fritsche-Neto
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 5.699

10.  Estimation of non-additive genetic variance in human complex traits from a large sample of unrelated individuals.

Authors:  Valentin Hivert; Julia Sidorenko; Florian Rohart; Michael E Goddard; Jian Yang; Naomi R Wray; Loic Yengo; Peter M Visscher
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 11.025

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.