Literature DB >> 29743175

Genomic Model with Correlation Between Additive and Dominance Effects.

Tao Xiang1,2,3, Ole Fredslund Christensen3, Zulma Gladis Vitezica4, Andres Legarra2.   

Abstract

Dominance genetic effects are rarely included in pedigree-based genetic evaluation. With the availability of single nucleotide polymorphism markers and the development of genomic evaluation, estimates of dominance genetic effects have become feasible using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP). Usually, studies involving additive and dominance genetic effects ignore possible relationships between them. It has been often suggested that the magnitude of functional additive and dominance effects at the quantitative trait loci are related, but there is no existing GBLUP-like approach accounting for such correlation. Wellmann and Bennewitz (2012) showed two ways of considering directional relationships between additive and dominance effects, which they estimated in a Bayesian framework. However, these relationships cannot be fitted at the level of individuals instead of loci in a mixed model, and are not compatible with standard animal or plant breeding software. This comes from a fundamental ambiguity in assigning the reference allele at a given locus. We show that, if there has been selection, assigning the most frequent as the reference allele orients the correlation between functional additive and dominance effects. As a consequence, the most frequent reference allele is expected to have a positive value. We also demonstrate that selection creates negative covariance between genotypic additive and dominance genetic values. For parameter estimation, it is possible to use a combined additive and dominance relationship matrix computed from marker genotypes, and to use standard restricted maximum likelihood algorithms based on an equivalent model. Through a simulation study, we show that such correlations can easily be estimated by mixed model software and that the accuracy of prediction for genetic values is slightly improved if such correlations are used in GBLUP. However, a model assuming uncorrelated effects and fitting orthogonal breeding values and dominant deviations performed similarly for prediction.
Copyright © 2018 by the Genetics Society of America.

Keywords:  GenPred; Genomic Selection; additive genetic effects; correlation; dominance genetic effects; genomic model; shared data resource

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29743175      PMCID: PMC6028252          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.118.301015

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


  21 in total

1.  Bayesian models with dominance effects for genomic evaluation of quantitative traits.

Authors:  Robin Wellmann; Jörn Bennewitz
Journal:  Genet Res (Camb)       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.588

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.  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

4.  The contribution of dominance to the understanding of quantitative genetic variation.

Authors:  Robin Wellmann; Jörn Bennewitz
Journal:  Genet Res (Camb)       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 1.588

5.  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

6.  Assessing effective population size, coancestry and inbreeding effects on litter size using the pedigree and SNP data in closed lines of the Iberian pig breed.

Authors:  L Silió; C Barragán; A I Fernández; J García-Casco; M C Rodríguez
Journal:  J Anim Breed Genet       Date:  2015-06-08       Impact factor: 2.380

7.  Including nonadditive genetic effects in mating programs to maximize dairy farm profitability.

Authors:  H Aliloo; J E Pryce; O González-Recio; B G Cocks; M E Goddard; B J Hayes
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 4.034

Review 8.  Data and theory point to mainly additive genetic variance for complex traits.

Authors:  William G Hill; Michael E Goddard; Peter M Visscher
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2008-02-29       Impact factor: 5.917

9.  Genome-wide and local pattern of linkage disequilibrium and persistence of phase for 3 Danish pig breeds.

Authors:  Lei Wang; Peter Sørensen; Luc Janss; Tage Ostersen; David Edwards
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 2.797

10.  Genomic BLUP including additive and dominant variation in purebreds and F1 crossbreds, with an application in pigs.

Authors:  Zulma G Vitezica; Luis Varona; Jean-Michel Elsen; Ignacy Misztal; William Herring; Andrès Legarra
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 4.297

View more
  9 in total

1.  Life-history genotype explains variation in migration activity in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).

Authors:  Petri T Niemelä; Ines Klemme; Anssi Karvonen; Pekka Hyvärinen; Paul V Debes; Jaakko Erkinaro; Marion Sinclair-Waters; Victoria L Pritchard; Laura S Härkönen; Craig R Primmer
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 5.530

2.  Genomic Prediction Methods Accounting for Nonadditive Genetic Effects.

Authors:  Luis Varona; Andres Legarra; Miguel A Toro; Zulma G Vitezica
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

3.  Impacts of additive, dominance, and inbreeding depression effects on genomic evaluation by combining two SNP chips in Canadian Yorkshire pigs bred in China.

Authors:  Quanshun Mei; Zulma G Vitezica; Jielin Li; Shuhong Zhao; Andres Legarra; Tao Xiang
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-10-22       Impact factor: 5.100

4.  Optimum mating designs for exploiting dominance in genomic selection schemes for aquaculture species.

Authors:  Jesús Fernández; Beatriz Villanueva; Miguel Angel Toro
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 4.297

5.  Vector space algebra for scaling and centering relationship matrices under non-Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium conditions.

Authors:  Luis Gomez-Raya; Wendy M Rauw; Jack C M Dekkers
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 4.297

6.  Genetic parameters, prediction, and selection in a white Guinea yam early-generation breeding population using pedigree information.

Authors:  Asrat Asfaw; Dotun Samuel Aderonmu; Kwabena Darkwa; David De Koeyer; Paterne Agre; Ayodeji Abe; Bunmi Olasanmi; Patrick Adebola; Robert Asiedu
Journal:  Crop Sci       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 2.319

7.  Genomic mating in outbred species: predicting cross usefulness with additive and total genetic covariance matrices.

Authors:  Marnin D Wolfe; Ariel W Chan; Peter Kulakow; Ismail Rabbi; Jean-Luc Jannink
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 4.562

8.  Multivariate GBLUP Improves Accuracy of Genomic Selection for Yield and Fruit Weight in Biparental Populations of Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.

Authors:  Giovanny Covarrubias-Pazaran; Brandon Schlautman; Luis Diaz-Garcia; Edward Grygleski; James Polashock; Jennifer Johnson-Cicalese; Nicholi Vorsa; Massimo Iorizzo; Juan Zalapa
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 5.753

9.  Estimating dominance genetic variances for growth traits in American Angus males using genomic models.

Authors:  Carolina A Garcia-Baccino; Daniela A L Lourenco; Stephen Miller; Rodolfo J C Cantet; Zulma G Vitezica
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.