Literature DB >> 31495630

Controlling bias in genomic breeding values for young genotyped bulls.

S Tsuruta1, D A L Lourenco2, Y Masuda2, I Misztal2, T J Lawlor3.   

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to investigate bias in genomic predictions for dairy cattle and to find a practical approach to reduce the bias. The simulated data included phenotypes, pedigrees, and genotypes, mimicking a dairy cattle population (i.e., cows with phenotypes and bulls with no phenotypes) and assuming selection by breeding values or no selection. With the simulated data, genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were calculated with a single-step genomic BLUP and compared with true breeding values. Phenotypes and genotypes were simulated in 10 generations and in the last 4 generations, respectively. Phenotypes in the last generation were removed to predict breeding values for those individuals using only genomic and pedigree information. Complete pedigrees and incomplete pedigrees with 50% missing dams were created to construct the pedigree-based relationship matrix with and without inbreeding. With missing dams, unknown parent groups (UPG) were assigned in relationship matrices. Regression coefficients (b1) and coefficients of determination (R2) of true breeding values on (G)EBV were calculated to investigate inflation and accuracy in GEBV for genotyped animals, respectively. In addition to the simulation study, 18 linear type traits of US Holsteins were examined. For the 18 type traits, b1 and R2 of GEBV with full data sets on GEBV with partial data sets for young genotyped bulls were calculated. The results from the simulation study indicated inflation in GEBV for genotyped males that were evaluated with only pedigree and genomic information under BLUP selection. However, when UPG for only pedigree-based relationships were included, the inflation was reduced, accuracy was highest, and genetic trends had no bias. For the linear type traits, when UPG for only pedigree-based relationships were included, the results were generally in agreement with those from the simulation study, implying less bias in genetic trends. However, when including no UPG, UPG in pedigree-based relationships, or UPG in genomic relationships, inflation and accuracy in GEBV were similar. The results from the simulation and type traits suggest that UPG must be defined accurately to be estimable and inbreeding should be included in pedigree-based relationships. In dairy cattle, known pedigree information with inbreeding and estimable UPG plays an important role in improving compatibility between pedigree-based and genomic relationship matrices, resulting in more reliable genomic predictions.
Copyright © 2019 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  US Holstein; genomic prediction; unknown parent group

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31495630     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2019-16789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  9 in total

1.  Beef trait genetic parameters based on old and recent data and its implications for genomic predictions in Italian Simmental cattle.

Authors:  Alberto Cesarani; Jorge Hidalgo; Andre Garcia; Lorenzo Degano; Daniele Vicario; Yutaka Masuda; Ignacy Misztal; Daniela Lourenco
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Prediction ability for growth and maternal traits using SNP arrays based on different marker densities in Nellore cattle using the ssGBLUP.

Authors:  Juan Diego Rodriguez Neira; Elisa Peripolli; Maria Paula Marinho de Negreiros; Rafael Espigolan; Rodrigo López-Correa; Ignacio Aguilar; Raysildo B Lobo; Fernando Baldi
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Impact of genomic preselection on subsequent genetic evaluations with ssGBLUP using real data from pigs.

Authors:  Ibrahim Jibrila; Jeremie Vandenplas; Jan Ten Napel; Rob Bergsma; Roel F Veerkamp; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 5.100

4.  Comparison of models for missing pedigree in single-step genomic prediction.

Authors:  Yutaka Masuda; Shogo Tsuruta; Matias Bermann; Heather L Bradford; Ignacy Misztal
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Development of genomic predictions for Angus cattle in Brazil incorporating genotypes from related American sires.

Authors:  Gabriel Soares Campos; Fernando Flores Cardoso; Claudia Cristina Gulias Gomes; Robert Domingues; Luciana Correia de Almeida Regitano; Marcia Cristina de Sena Oliveira; Henrique Nunes de Oliveira; Roberto Carvalheiro; Lucia Galvão Albuquerque; Stephen Miller; Ignacy Misztal; Daniela Lourenco
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Validation of single-step genomic predictions using the linear regression method for milk yield and heat tolerance in a Thai-Holstein population.

Authors:  Piriyaporn Sungkhapreecha; Ignacy Misztal; Jorge Hidalgo; Daniela Lourenco; Sayan Buaban; Vibuntita Chankitisakul; Wuttigrai Boonkum
Journal:  Vet World       Date:  2021-12-15

7.  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

8.  Correcting for base-population differences and unknown parent groups in single-step genomic predictions of Norwegian Red cattle.

Authors:  Tesfaye K Belay; Leiv S Eikje; Arne B Gjuvsland; Øyvind Nordbø; Thierry Tribout; Theo Meuwissen
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-09-01       Impact factor: 3.338

Review 9.  Single-Step Genomic Evaluations from Theory to Practice: Using SNP Chips and Sequence Data in BLUPF90.

Authors:  Daniela Lourenco; Andres Legarra; Shogo Tsuruta; Yutaka Masuda; Ignacio Aguilar; Ignacy Misztal
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 4.096

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.