Sample size determination for training set optimization in genomic prediction

被引:9
作者
Wu, Po-Ya [1 ,2 ]
Ou, Jen-Hsiang [1 ,3 ]
Liao, Chen-Tuo [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Taiwan Univ, Dept Agron, Taipei, Taiwan
[2] Heinrich Heine Univ, Inst Quant Genet & Genom Plants, Dusseldorf, Germany
[3] Uppsala Univ, Dept Med Biochem & Microbiol, Uppsala, Sweden
关键词
CALIBRATION SET; LINEAR-MODELS; SELECTION; ACCURACY; INDIVIDUALS; REGRESSION; PRECISION;
D O I
10.1007/s00122-023-04254-9
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Genomic prediction (GP) is a statistical method used to select quantitative traits in animal or plant breeding. For this purpose, a statistical prediction model is first built that uses phenotypic and genotypic data in a training set. The trained model is then used to predict genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) for individuals within a breeding population. Setting the sample size of the training set usually takes into account time and space constraints that are inevitable in an agricultural experiment. However, the determination of the sample size remains an unresolved issue for a GP study. By applying the logistic growth curve to identify prediction accuracy for the GEBVs and the training set size, a practical approach was developed to determine a cost-effective optimal training set for a given genome dataset with known genotypic data. Three real genome datasets were used to illustrate the proposed approach. An R function is provided to facilitate widespread application of this approach to sample size determination, which can help breeders to identify a set of genotypes with an economical sample size for selective phenotyping.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Use and optimization of different sources of information for genomic prediction
    Ilska, Joanna J.
    Meuwissen, Theo H. E.
    Kranis, Andreas
    Woolliams, John A.
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2017, 49
  • [22] Optimization of Selective Phenotyping and Population Design for Genomic Prediction
    Heslot, Nicolas
    Feoktistov, Vitaliy
    JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL STATISTICS, 2020, 25 (04) : 579 - 600
  • [23] Elite germplasm introduction, training set composition, and genetic optimization algorithms effect on genomic selection-based breeding programs
    Fritsche-Neto, Roberto
    Yassue, Rafael Massahiro
    da Silva, Allison Vieira
    Prado, Melina
    DoVale, Julio Cesar
    CROP SCIENCE, 2024, 64 (06) : 3323 - 3338
  • [24] Optimization of training sets for genomic prediction of early-stage single crosses in maize
    Kadam, Dnyaneshwar C.
    Rodriguez, Oscar R.
    Lorenz, Aaron J.
    THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS, 2021, 134 (02) : 687 - 699
  • [25] Assessment of genomic prediction reliability and optimization of experimental designs in multi-environment trials
    Rio, Simon
    Akdemir, Deniz
    Carvalho, Tiago
    Sanchez, Julio Isidro Y.
    THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS, 2022, 135 (02) : 405 - 419
  • [26] On-the-fly selection of a training set for aqueous solubility prediction
    Zhang, Hongzhou
    Ando, Howard Y.
    Chen, Linna
    Lee, Pil H.
    MOLECULAR PHARMACEUTICS, 2007, 4 (04) : 489 - 497
  • [27] Calculating the sample size required for developing a clinical prediction model
    Riley, Richard D.
    Ensor, Joie
    Snell, Kym I. E.
    Harrell, Frank E., Jr.
    Martin, Glen P.
    Reitsma, Johannes B.
    Moons, Karel G. M.
    Collins, Gary
    van Smeden, Maarten
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 368
  • [28] Sample Size Determination: Likelihood Bootstrapping
    Kiselev, N. S.
    Grabovoy, A. V.
    COMPUTATIONAL MATHEMATICS AND MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS, 2025, 65 (02) : 416 - 423
  • [29] Impact of relationships between test and training animals and among training animals on reliability of genomic prediction
    Wu, X.
    Lund, M. S.
    Sun, D.
    Zhang, Q.
    Su, G.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2015, 132 (05) : 366 - 375
  • [30] Two Measures for Sample Size Determination
    Eichenberger, Philippe
    Hulliger, Beat
    Potterat, Jann
    SURVEY RESEARCH METHODS, 2011, 5 (01): : 27 - 37