| Literature DB >> 30420469 |
Moses Nyine1, Shichen Wang1, Kian Kiani1, Katherine Jordan1, Shuyu Liu2, Patrick Byrne3, Scott Haley3, Stephen Baenziger4, Shiaoman Chao5, Robert Bowden6, Eduard Akhunov7.
Abstract
Genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) variation allows for the capture of haplotype structure in populations and prediction of unobserved genotypes based on inferred regions of identity-by-descent (IBD). Here we have used a first-generation wheat haplotype map created by targeted re-sequencing of low-copy genomic regions in the reference panel of 62 lines to impute marker genotypes in a diverse panel of winter wheat cultivars from the U.S. Great Plains. The IBD segments between the reference population and winter wheat cultivars were identified based on SNP genotyped using the 90K iSelect wheat array and genotyping by sequencing (GBS). A genome-wide association study and genomic prediction of resistance to stripe rust in winter wheat cultivars showed that an increase in marker density achieved by imputation improved both the power and precision of trait mapping and prediction. The majority of the most significant marker-trait associations belonged to imputed genotypes. With the vast amount of SNP variation data accumulated for wheat in recent years, the presented imputation framework will greatly improve prediction accuracy in breeding populations and increase resolution of trait mapping hence, facilitate cross-referencing of genotype datasets available across different wheat populations.Entities:
Keywords: GWAS; GenPred; Genomic Prediction; Imputation; SNP; Shared Data Resources; Wheat HapMap
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30420469 PMCID: PMC6325902 DOI: 10.1534/g3.118.200664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Figure 1Genotype imputation using the exome capture SNP. Impact of genotype probability cutoff value on the accuracy (A) and the proportion of missing genotypes (B) in the imputed datasets. NA30, NA40, NA50, NA60 and NA70 correspond to simulated SNP containing 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% and 70% of genotypes missing, respectively. C. The number of imputed SNP in the WWAM panel genotyped using different approaches.
Figure 2Boxplots of phenotypic data collected for stripe rust resistance for the WWAM panel.
Figure 3Significance of marker-trait associations using genotyped (blue) and imputed (red) SNP. Pair-wise LD (r2) between SNP is shown below each chromosomal region.
BayesB and RKHS prediction of stripe rust resistance for WWAM panel using SNP markers genotyped using 90K iSelect array, GBS and selected imputed markers with p-value ≤ 0.05 as informed by GWAS results
| BayesB model | RKHS model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | SNP set 1 | SNP set 2 | % gain | SNP set 1 | SNP set 2 | % gain |
| IT_mean | 0.341 (0.019) | 0.561 (0.023) | 64.5 | 0.331 (0.020) | 0.556 (0.023) | 68.0 |
| IT_BLUP | 0.385 (0.021) | 0.582 (0.021) | 51.2 | 0.362 (0.020) | 0.576 (0.021) | 59.1 |
| SV_Mean | 0.348 (0.014) | 0.532 (0.016) | 52.9 | 0.343 (0.014) | 0.534 (0.014) | 55.7 |
| SV_BLUP | 0.350 (0.015) | 0.542 (0.017) | 54.9 | 0.350 (0.015) | 0.540 (0.016) | 54.3 |
| SD | 0.532 (0.013) | 0.532 (0.017) | 0.0 | 0.530 (0.015) | 0.532 (0.017) | 0.4 |
IT is infection type, SV is severity, SD is seedling resistance, SNP set 1 = 90K and GBS, SNP set 2 = 90K, GBS and imputed, % gain = 100*((SNP set 2 – SNP set 1)/ SNP set 1), values in parentheses are standard errors.