Machine learning methods for genomic prediction of cow behavioral traits measured by automatic milking systems in North American Holstein cattle

被引:6
作者
Pedrosa, Victor B. [1 ]
Chen, Shi-Yi [1 ,2 ]
Gloria, Leonardo S. [1 ]
Doucette, Jarrod S. [1 ,3 ]
Boerman, Jacquelyn P.
Rosa, Guilherme J. M. [4 ]
Brito, Luiz F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Purdue Univ, Dept Anim Sci, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[2] Sichuan Agr Univ, Farm Anim Genet Resources Explorat & Innovat, Key Lab Sichuan Prov, Chengdu 611130, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[3] Purdue Univ, Agr Informat Technol AgIT, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[4] Univ Wisconsin Madison, Dept Anim & Dairy Sci, Madison, WI 53706 USA
基金
美国食品与农业研究所;
关键词
accuracy of prediction; automatic milking systems; deep learning; sensor-based systems; REGRESSION; SELECTION; PLANT;
D O I
10.3168/jds.2023-24082
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Identifying genome-enabled methods that provide more accurate genomic prediction is crucial when evaluating complex traits such as dairy cow behavior. In this study, we aimed to compare the predictive performance of traditional genomic prediction methods and deep learning algorithms for genomic prediction of milking refusals (MREF) and milking failures (MFAIL) in North American Holstein cows measured by automatic milking systems (milking robots). A total of 1,993,509 daily records from 4,511 genotyped Holstein cows were collected by 36 milking robot stations. After quality control, 57,600 SNPs were available for the analyses. Four genomic prediction methods were considered: Bayesian least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), multiple layer perceptron (MLP), convolutional neural network (CNN), and GBLUP. We implemented the first 3 methods using the Keras and TensorFlow libraries in Python (v.3.9) but the GBLUP method was implemented using the BLUPF90+ family programs. The accuracy of genomic prediction (mean square error) for MREF and MFAIL was 0.34 (0.08) and 0.27 (0.08) based on LASSO, 0.36 (0.09) and 0.32 (0.09) for MLP, 0.37 (0.08) and 0.30 (0.09) for CNN, and 0.35 (0.09) and 0.31(0.09) based on GBLUP, respectively. Additionally, we observed a lower reranking of top selected individuals based on the MLP versus CNN methods compared with the other approaches for both MREF and MFAIL. Although the deep learning methods showed slightly higher accuracies than GBLUP, the results may not be sufficient to justify their use over traditional methods due to their higher computational demand and the difficulty of performing genomic prediction for nongenotyped individuals using deep learning procedures. Overall, this study provides insights into the potential feasibility of using deep learning methods to enhance genomic prediction accuracy for behavioral traits in livestock. Further research is needed to determine their practical applicability to large dairy cattle breeding programs.
引用
收藏
页码:4758 / 4771
页数:14
相关论文
共 69 条
  • [1] Abadi M, 2016, PROCEEDINGS OF OSDI'16: 12TH USENIX SYMPOSIUM ON OPERATING SYSTEMS DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION, P265
  • [2] Deep learning versus parametric and ensemble methods for genomic prediction of complex phenotypes
    Abdollahi-Arpanahi, Rostam L.
    Gianola, Daniel
    Penagaricano, Francisco
    [J]. GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2020, 52 (01)
  • [3] Can Deep Learning Improve Genomic Prediction of Complex Human Traits?
    Bellot, Pau
    de los Campos, Gustavo
    Perez-Enciso, Miguel
    [J]. GENETICS, 2018, 210 (03) : 809 - 819
  • [4] Comparison of methods used to identify superior individuals in genomic selection in plant breeding
    Bhering, L. L.
    Junqueira, V. S.
    Peixoto, L. A.
    Cruz, C. D.
    Laviola, B. G.
    [J]. GENETICS AND MOLECULAR RESEARCH, 2015, 14 (03) : 10888 - 10896
  • [5] A genetic algorithm-assisted deep learning approach for crop yield prediction
    Bi, Luning
    Hu, Guiping
    [J]. SOFT COMPUTING, 2021, 25 (16) : 10617 - 10628
  • [6] Broom D. M., 1993, Stress and animal welfare.
  • [7] Clark Samuel A, 2013, Methods Mol Biol, V1019, P321, DOI 10.1007/978-1-62703-447-0_13
  • [8] Different models of genetic variation and their effect on genomic evaluation
    Clark, Samuel A.
    Hickey, John M.
    van der Werf, Julius H. J.
    [J]. GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2011, 43
  • [9] Whole-Genome Regression and Prediction Methods Applied to Plant and Animal Breeding
    de los Campos, Gustavo
    Hickey, John M.
    Pong-Wong, Ricardo
    Daetwyler, Hans D.
    Calus, Mario P. L.
    [J]. GENETICS, 2013, 193 (02) : 327 - +
  • [10] Predicting Quantitative Traits With Regression Models for Dense Molecular Markers and Pedigree
    de los Campos, Gustavo
    Naya, Hugo
    Gianola, Daniel
    Crossa, Jose
    Legarra, Andres
    Manfredi, Eduardo
    Weigel, Kent
    Cotes, Jose Miguel
    [J]. GENETICS, 2009, 182 (01) : 375 - 385