Literature DB >> 31772074

Breeding Top Genotypes and Accelerating Response to Recurrent Selection by Selecting Parents with Greater Gametic Variance.

Piter Bijma1, Yvonne C J Wientjes2, Mario P L Calus2.   

Abstract

Because of variation in linkage phase and heterozygosity among individuals, some individuals produce genetically more variable gametes than others. With the availability of genomic EBVs (GEBVs) or estimates of SNP-effects together with phased genotypes, differences in gametic variability can be quantified by simulating a set of virtual gametes of each selection candidate. Previous results in dairy cattle show that gametic variance can be large. Here, we show that breeders can increase the probability of breeding a top-ranking genotype and response to recurrent selection by selecting parents that produce more variable gametes, using the index [Formula: see text] where [Formula: see text] is the standardized normal truncation point belonging to selected proportion p, and SDgGEBV is the SD of the GEBV of an individual's gametes. Benefits of the index were considerably larger in an ongoing selection program with equilibrium genetic parameters than in an initially unselected population. Superiority of the index over selection on GEBV increased strongly with the magnitude of the [Formula: see text] indicating that benefits of the index may vary considerably among populations. Compared to selection on ordinary GEBV, the probability of breeding a top-ranking individual can be increased by ∼36%, and response to selection by ∼3.6% when selection is strong (P = 0.001) based on values for the Holstein-Friesian dairy cattle population. Two-stage selection, with a preselection on GEBV and a final selection on the index, considerably reduced computational requirements with little loss of benefits. Response to multiple generations of selection and inheritance of the SDgEBV require further study.
Copyright © 2020 by the Genetics Society of America.

Entities:  

Keywords:  GEBV; Mendelian sampling; gametic breeding value; genomic selection; response to selection; usefulness criterion; virtual gametes; within-family variation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31772074      PMCID: PMC6944402          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.119.302643

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


  27 in total

1.  Use of haplotypes to estimate Mendelian sampling effects and selection limits.

Authors:  J B Cole; P M VanRaden
Journal:  J Anim Breed Genet       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 2.380

2.  Selection on Optimal Haploid Value Increases Genetic Gain and Preserves More Genetic Diversity Relative to Genomic Selection.

Authors:  Hans D Daetwyler; Matthew J Hayden; German C Spangenberg; Ben J Hayes
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Variance of gametic diversity and its application in selection programs.

Authors:  D J A Santos; J B Cole; T J Lawlor; P M VanRaden; H Tonhati; L Ma
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2019-04-10       Impact factor: 4.034

4.  Long-term selection strategies for complex traits using high-density genetic markers.

Authors:  K E Kemper; P J Bowman; J E Pryce; B J Hayes; M E Goddard
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.034

5.  Improving Response in Genomic Selection with a Population-Based Selection Strategy: Optimal Population Value Selection.

Authors:  Matthew Goiffon; Aaron Kusmec; Lizhi Wang; Guiping Hu; Patrick S Schnable
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Recombination rate and reproductive success in humans.

Authors:  Augustine Kong; John Barnard; Daniel F Gudbjartsson; Gudmar Thorleifsson; Gudrun Jonsdottir; Sigrun Sigurdardottir; Bjorgvin Richardsson; Jonina Jonsdottir; Thorgeir Thorgeirsson; Michael L Frigge; Neil E Lamb; Stephanie Sherman; Jeffrey R Gulcher; Kari Stefansson
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2004-10-03       Impact factor: 38.330

7.  Selection on Expected Maximum Haploid Breeding Values Can Increase Genetic Gain in Recurrent Genomic Selection.

Authors:  Dominik Müller; Pascal Schopp; Albrecht E Melchinger
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 3.154

8.  Estimated allele substitution effects underlying genomic evaluation models depend on the scaling of allele counts.

Authors:  Aniek C Bouwman; Ben J Hayes; Mario P L Calus
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 4.297

9.  Usefulness Criterion and Post-selection Parental Contributions in Multi-parental Crosses: Application to Polygenic Trait Introgression.

Authors:  Antoine Allier; Laurence Moreau; Alain Charcosset; Simon Teyssèdre; Christina Lehermeier
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 3.154

10.  Imperfect Linkage Disequilibrium Generates Phantom Epistasis (& Perils of Big Data).

Authors:  Gustavo de Los Campos; Daniel Alberto Sorensen; Miguel Angel Toro
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 3.154

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Crop breeding for a changing climate: integrating phenomics and genomics with bioinformatics.

Authors:  Jacob I Marsh; Haifei Hu; Mitchell Gill; Jacqueline Batley; David Edwards
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 5.699

2.  Emerging issues in genomic selection.

Authors:  Ignacy Misztal; Ignacio Aguilar; Daniela Lourenco; Li Ma; Juan Pedro Steibel; Miguel Toro
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  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

4.  Origin Specific Genomic Selection: A Simple Process To Optimize the Favorable Contribution of Parents to Progeny.

Authors:  Chin Jian Yang; Rajiv Sharma; Gregor Gorjanc; Sarah Hearne; Wayne Powell; Ian Mackay
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 3.154

5.  Gamevar.f90: a software package for calculating individual gametic diversity.

Authors:  Daniel Jordan de Abreu Santos; John B Cole; George E Liu; Paul M VanRaden; Li Ma
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Why and How to Switch to Genomic Selection: Lessons From Plant and Animal Breeding Experience.

Authors:  Aline Fugeray-Scarbel; Catherine Bastien; Mathilde Dupont-Nivet; Stéphane Lemarié
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 4.599

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.