Iranian Journal of animal Science

Iranian Journal of animal Science

Estimating accuracy of genomic breeding values for complex traits in populations without pedigree using dense markers

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Elham Elahinejad 1
Hossein Mehrban 2
Mostafa Shakhsi-Niaei 3
1 M.Sc. Student, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Genetics, Faculty of Science, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran
10.22059/ijas.2017.228764.653517
Abstract
The aim of this study was to estimate the accuracy of genomic breeding values using GBLUP (Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) model and compare it with the traditional method with (BLUP) and without (BLUP_noPed) pedigree by computer simulation. In this study, a genome with 30 pairs of chromosomes, 3000 QTL and 45000 marker (SNP) was simulated. The different scenarios including two effective population of 100 and 1000 animals, two reference population size of 1000 and 2000 animals and three heritabilities, low (0.05), medium (0.30) and high (0.5)  were investigated. The criteria were accuracy, bias and mean square error (MSE) of breeding value to compare traditional and genomic methods. The results showed that the accuracy of breeding values increased with increasing heritability. GBLUP mehtod was more accurate than BLUP_noPed in all scenarios and the former model had more performance in higher heritability compared with BLUP model. The accuracy of genomic breeding values decreased about 11% with increasing effective population size 100 to 1000; however, the accuracy of traditional methods was not affected by changing effective population size. Increasing the reference population size 1000 to 2000, the accuracy of genomic breeding values was improved by 5%. Although, the bias (underestimate) was higher for genomic than traditional methods in all scenario; but the MSE of breeding values was lower for GBLUP than BLUP model with increasing reference population size and heritability. Therefore, GBLUP method can be used to select top animals in populations without pedigree.
Keywords
Accuracy
effective population
Genomic Selection
heritability
simulation
  1. Abdollahi-Arpanahi, R., Pakdel, A. & Zandi- Baghchehmaryam, M. B. (2012). From infinitesimal model to Genomic Selection. Modern Genetics, 17(2), 105-114. (in Farsi)
  2. Aguilar, I., Misztal, I., Tsuruta, S., Legarra, A. & Wang, H. (2014). PREGSF90–POSTGSF90: computational tools for the implementation of single-step genomic selection and genome-wide association with ungenotyped individuals in BLUPF90 programs. In: Proceedings of 10th World Congress of Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 17-22 Aug., Vancouver, Canada, pp. 1-3.
  3. Baloche, G., Legarra, A., Sallé, G., Larroque, H., Astruc, J. M., Robert-Granié, C. & Barillet, F. (2014). Assessment of accuracy of genomic prediction for French Lacaune dairy sheep. Journal of Dairy Science, 97(2), 1107-1116.‏
  4. Clark, S. A., Hickey, J. M. & van der Werf, J. H. (2011). Different models of genetic variation and their effect on genomic evaluation. Genetics Selection Evaluation, 43(1), 18-27.
  5. Daetwyler, H. D., Villanueva, B., Bijma, P. & Woolliams, J. A. (2007). Inbreeding in genome‐wide selection.  Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 124(6), 369-376.
  6. Daetwyler, H. D., Pong-Wong, R., Villanueva, B. & Woolliams, J. A. (2010). The impact of genetic architecture on genome-wide evaluation methods. Genetics, 185(3), 1021-1031.
  7. Daetwyler, H. D., Swan, A. A., van der Werf, J. H. & Hayes, B. J. (2012). Accuracy of pedigree and genomic predictions of carcass and novel meat quality traits in multi-breed sheep data assessed by cross-validation. Genetics Selection Evolution, 44(1), 33-44.‏
  8. Falconer, D. S. & Mackay, T. F. C. (2005). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. (5th ed.). Longman, London.
  9. Fisher, R. A. (1918). The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance. Transactions of the Royal Society, Edinburgh 52, 399-433.
  10. Forneris, N. S., Steibel, J. P., Legarra, A., Vitezica, Z. G., Bates, R. O., Ernst, C. W., Basso, A. L. & Cantet, R. J. C. (2016). A comparison of methods to estimate genomic relationships using pedigree and markers in livestock populations. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 133(6), 452-462.‏
  11. Foroutanifar, S., Mehrabani-Yeganeh, H. & Moradi- Shahrbabak, M. (2012). Effects of heritability, number of individuals in training population and map density on accuracy of single and two traits estimated genomic breeding values. In: Proceedings of 12th Iranian genetics congress., 21-23 May., Tehran, Iran, pp. 1-2. (in Farsi)
  12. Foroutanifar, S. (2016). Sensitivity of genomic single and multi – trait prediction accuracy to genetic architecture of the traits. Modern Genetics Journal, 11(3), 391-398. (In Farsi)
  13. Gao, N., Li, J., He, J., Xiao, G., Luo, Y., Zhang, H., Chen, Z. & Zhang, Z. (2015). Improving accuracy of genomic prediction by genetic architecture based priors in a Bayesian model. BMC genetics, 16(1), 120-131.‏
  14. Guo, G., Lund, M. S., Zhang, Y. & Su, G. (2010). Comparison between genomic predictions using daughter yield deviation and conventional estimated breeding value as response variables. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 127(6), 423-432.
  15. Habier, D., Fernando, R. L., Kizilkaya, K. & Garrick, D. J. (2011). Extension of the Bayesian alphabet for genomic selection. BMC Genetics, 12 (1), 186-198.
  16. Hayes, B. J., Bowman, P. J., Chamberlin, A. C. & Goddard, M. E. (2009). Invited review genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 433-443.
  17. Henderson, C. R. (1984). Applications of Linear Models in Animal Breeding. University of Guelph Press, Guelph, Canada.
  18. Koivula, M., Strandén, I., Su, G. & Mäntysaari, E. A. (2012). Different methods to calculate genomic predictions-Comparisons of BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP). Journal of Dairy Science, 95(7), 4065-4073.
  19. Legarra, A., Christensen, O.F., Aguilar, I. & Misztal, I. (2014). Single Step, a general approach for genomic selection. Livestock Science, 166, 54-65.
  20. Luan, T., Woolliams, J. A., Lien, S., Kent, M., Svendsen, M. & Meuwissen, T. H. (2009). The accuracy of genomic selection in Norwegian red cattle assessed by cross-validation. Genetics, 183(3), 1119-1126.‏
  21. Masuda, Y., Misztal, I., Tsuruta, S., Legarra, A., Aguilar, I., Lourenco, D. A. L., Fragomeni, B. O. & Lawlor, T. J. (2016). Implementation of genomic recursions in single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor for US Holsteins with a large number of genotyped animals. Journal of Dairy Science, 99(3), 1968-1974.‏
  22. Mehrban, H., Lee, D. H., Moradi, M. H., IlCho, C., Naserkheil, M. & Ibáñez-Escriche, N. (2017). Predictive performance of genomic selection methods for carcass traits in Hanwoo beef cattle: impacts of the genetic architecture. Genetics Selection Evolution, Jan 4, 49(1), 1-13.
  23. Meuwissen, T. H., Hayes, B. J. & Goddard, M. E. (2001). Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics, 157(4), 1819-1829.
  24. Meuwissen, T. H., Svendsen, M., Solberg, T. & Ødegård, J. (2015). Genomic predictions based on animal models using genotype imputation on a national scale in Norwegian Red cattle. Genetics Selection Evolution, 47(1), 79-88.
  25. Misztal, I., Tsuruta, S., Strabel, T., Auvray, B., Druet, T. & Lee, D. H. (2002). BLUPF90 and related programs (BGF90).In:Proceedings of 7th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production,19-23 Aug., Montpellier, France, pp. 1-2.
  26. Mrode, R. A. (2005). Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values. (3rd ed.). CABI.‏
  27. Naghavi, M. R., Ghare Reazi, B. & Hosiny Salkade, G. H. (2007). Molecular marker. (2nd ed.). Tehran University press. (in Farsi)
  28. Nejati-Javaremi, A., Smith, C. & Gibson, J. P. (1997). Effect of total allelic relationship on accuracy of evaluation and response to selection. Animal Science, 7(5), 1738-1745.
  29. Neves, H. H., Carvalheiro, R. & Queiroz, S. A. (2012). A comparison of statistical methods for genomic selection in a mice population. BMC genetics, 13 (1), 100-117.
  30. Saatchi, M., Miraei-Ashtiani, S. R., Nejati Javaremi, A., Moradi shahr babak, M. & Mehrabani-yeganeh, H. (2010). The impact of information quantity and strength of relationship between training set and validation set on accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(4), 438-442.
  31. Saatchi, M., McClure, M. C., McKay, S. D., Rolf, M. M., Kim, J., Decker, J. E. & Bauck, S. (2011). Accuracies of genomic breeding values in American Angus beef cattle using K-means clustering for cross-validation. Genetics Selection Evolution, 43(1), 40-56.‏
  32. Sargolzaei, M. & Schenkel, F. S. (2009). QMSim: a large-scale genome simulator for livestock. Bioinformatics, 25(5), 680-681.
  33. Schaeffer, L. R. (2006). Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 123, 218-223.
  34. Su, G., Madsen, P., Nielsen, U. S., Mäntysaari, E. A., Aamand, G. P., Christensen, O. F. & Lund, M. S. (2012). Genomic prediction for Nordic Red Cattle using one-step and selection index blending. Journal of dairy science, 95(2), 909-917.‏
  35. Sved, J. A. (1971). Linkage disequilibrium and homozygosity of chromosome segments in finite populations. Theoretical population biology, 2(2), 125-141.
  36. Tiezzi, F. & Maltecca, C. (2015). Accounting for trait architecture in genomic predictions of US Holstein cattle using a weighted realized relationship matrix. Genetics Selection Evolution, 47(1), 24-37.
  37. Van Raden, P. M. (2008). Efficient Methods to Compute Genomic Predictions. Journal of dairy science, 91 (11), 4414-4423.
  38. Wang, H., Misztal, I., Aguilar, I., Legarra, A. & Muir, W.M. (2012). Genome-wide association mapping including phenotypes from relatives without genotypes. Genetics Research, 94, 73-83.
  39. Wang, H., Misztal, I., Aguilar, I., Legarra, A., Fernando, R. L., Vitezica, Z., Okimoto, R., Wing, T., Hawken, R. & Muir, M. (2014). Genome wide association mapping including phenotypes from relatives without genotypes in a single-step (ssGWAS) for6 week body weight in broiler chickens. Frontiers in Genetics, 5, 134-143.
  40. Zhang, Z., Liu, J., Ding, X., Bijma, P., de Koning, D. J. & Zhang, Q. (2010). Best linear unbiased prediction of genomic breeding values using a trait-specific marker-derived relationship matrix. PloS One, 5(9), 12648-12656.
Iranian Journal of animal Science
Volume 48, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
Summer 2017
Pages 163-174

  • Receive Date 28 February 2017
  • Revise Date 18 June 2017
  • Accept Date 21 June 2017