Literature DB >> 30423111

Genomic prediction for crossbred performance using metafounders.

Elizabeth M van Grevenhof1, Jérémie Vandenplas1, Mario P L Calus1.   

Abstract

Future genomic evaluation models to be used routinely in breeding programs for pigs and poultry need to be able to optimally use information of crossbred (CB) animals to predict breeding values for CB performance of purebred (PB) selection candidates. Important challenges in the commonly used single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) model are the definition of relationships between the different line compositions and the definition of the base generation per line. The use of metafounders (MFs) in ssGBLUP has been proposed to overcome these issues. When relationships between lines are known to be different from 0, the use of MFs generalizes the concept of genetic groups relying on the genotype data. Our objective was to investigate the effect of using MFs in genomic prediction for CB performance on estimated variance components, and accuracy and bias of GEBV. This was studied using stochastic simulation to generate data representing a three-way crossbreeding scheme in pigs, with the parental lines being either closely related or unrelated. Results show that using MFs, the variance components should be scaled appropriately, especially when basing them on estimates obtained with, for example a pedigree-based model. The accuracies of GEBV that were obtained using MFs were similar to accuracies without using MFs, regardless whether the lines involved in the CB were closely related or unrelated. The use of MFs resulted in a model that had similar or somewhat better convergence properties compared to other models. We recommend the use of MFs in ssGBLUP for genomic evaluations in crossbreeding schemes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30423111      PMCID: PMC6358227          DOI: 10.1093/jas/sky433

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  25 in total

1.  Best linear unbiased allele-frequency estimation in complex pedigrees.

Authors:  Mary Sara McPeek; Xiaodong Wu; Carole Ober
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 2.  Reconciling the analysis of IBD and IBS in complex trait studies.

Authors:  Joseph E Powell; Peter M Visscher; Michael E Goddard
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 53.242

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

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

4.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

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

5.  Unknown-parent groups in single-step genomic evaluation.

Authors:  I Misztal; Z G Vitezica; A Legarra; I Aguilar; A A Swan
Journal:  J Anim Breed Genet       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 2.380

6.  Hot topic: a unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score.

Authors:  I Aguilar; I Misztal; D L Johnson; A Legarra; S Tsuruta; T J Lawlor
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.034

7.  Bias in genomic predictions for populations under selection.

Authors:  Z G Vitezica; I Aguilar; I Misztal; A Legarra
Journal:  Genet Res (Camb)       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 1.588

8.  genepop'007: a complete re-implementation of the genepop software for Windows and Linux.

Authors:  François Rousset
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 7.090

9.  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

10.  Compatibility of pedigree-based and marker-based relationship matrices for single-step genetic evaluation.

Authors:  Ole F Christensen
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 4.297

View more
  3 in total

1.  Accounting for population structure in genomic predictions of Eucalyptus globulus.

Authors:  Andrew N Callister; Matias Bermann; Stephen Elms; Ben P Bradshaw; Daniela Lourenco; Jeremy T Brawner
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 3.542

2.  Bias and accuracy of dairy sheep evaluations using BLUP and SSGBLUP with metafounders and unknown parent groups.

Authors:  Fernando L Macedo; Ole F Christensen; Jean-Michel Astruc; Ignacio Aguilar; Yutaka Masuda; Andrés Legarra
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 4.297

3.  Variance estimates are similar using pedigree or genomic relationships with or without the use of metafounders or the algorithm for proven and young animals1.

Authors:  Michael N Aldridge; Jérémie Vandenplas; Rob Bergsma; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 3.159

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.