Efficiency of multi-trait, indirect, and trait-assisted genomic selection for improvement of biomass sorghum

被引:125
作者
Fernandes, Samuel B. [1 ]
Dias, Kaio O. G. [2 ]
Ferreira, Daniel F. [3 ]
Brown, Patrick J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Dept Crop Sci, 1206 W Gregory Dr, Urbana, IL 61801 USA
[2] Univ Sao Paulo, Luiz de Queiroz Coll Agr, Dept Genet, POB 83, BR-13400970 Piracicaba, SP, Brazil
[3] Univ Fed Lavras, Dept Estat, BR-37200000 Lavras, MG, Brazil
基金
巴西圣保罗研究基金会;
关键词
PREDICTION; PLANT; ACCURACY; YIELD;
D O I
10.1007/s00122-017-3033-y
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
We compare genomic selection methods that use correlated traits to help predict biomass yield in sorghum, and find that trait-assisted genomic selection performs best. Genomic selection (GS) is usually performed on a single trait, but correlated traits can also help predict a focal trait through indirect or multi-trait GS. In this study, we use a pre-breeding population of biomass sorghum to compare strategies that use correlated traits to improve prediction of biomass yield, the focal trait. Correlated traits include moisture, plant height measured at monthly intervals between planting and harvest, and the area under the growth progress curve. In addition to single- and multi-trait direct and indirect GS, we test a new strategy called trait-assisted GS, in which correlated traits are used along with marker data in the validation population to predict a focal trait. Single-trait GS for biomass yield had a prediction accuracy of 0.40. Indirect GS performed best using area under the growth progress curve to predict biomass yield, with a prediction accuracy of 0.37, and did not differ from indirect multi-trait GS that also used moisture information. Multi-trait GS and single-trait GS yielded similar results, indicating that correlated traits did not improve prediction of biomass yield in a standard GS scenario. However, trait-assisted GS increased prediction accuracy by up to when using plant height in both the training and validation populations to help predict yield in the validation population. Coincidence between selected genotypes in phenotypic and genomic selection was also highest in trait-assisted GS. Overall, these results suggest that trait-assisted GS can be an efficient strategy when correlated traits are obtained earlier or more inexpensively than a focal trait.
引用
收藏
页码:747 / 755
页数:9
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   A Fast, Powerful Method for Detecting Identity by Descent [J].
Browning, Brian L. ;
Browning, Sharon R. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2011, 88 (02) :173-182
[2]  
Bruzi AT., 2015, American Journal of Plant Sciences, V6, P1862, DOI DOI 10.4236/AJPS.2015.611187
[3]   Genomic Prediction of Breeding Values when Modeling Genotype x Environment Interaction using Pedigree and Dense Molecular Markers [J].
Burgueno, Juan ;
de los Campos, Gustavo ;
Weigel, Kent ;
Crossa, Jose .
CROP SCIENCE, 2012, 52 (02) :707-719
[4]   Genomewide Association for Sugar Yield in Sweet Sorghum [J].
Burks, Payne S. ;
Kaiser, Chris M. ;
Hawkins, Elizabeth M. ;
Brown, Patrick J. .
CROP SCIENCE, 2015, 55 (05) :2138-2148
[5]  
Butler D. G., 2009, ASREML user guide release 3.0
[6]   Accuracy of multi-trait genomic selection using different methods [J].
Calus, Mario P. L. ;
Veerkamp, Roel F. .
GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2011, 43
[7]   Do Exogenous DNA Double-Strand Breaks Change Incomplete Synapsis and Chiasma Localization in the Grasshopper Stethophyma grossum? [J].
Calvente, Adela ;
Luis Santos, Juan ;
Rufas, Julio S. .
PLoS One, 2016, 11 (12)
[8]   Accuracy of Genomewide Selection for Different Traits with Constant Population Size, Heritability, and Number of Markers [J].
Combs, Emily ;
Bernardo, Rex .
PLANT GENOME, 2013, 6 (01)
[9]   Genomic Heritability: What Is It? [J].
de los Campos, Gustavo ;
Sorensen, Daniel ;
Gianola, Daniel .
PLOS GENETICS, 2015, 11 (05)
[10]   Whole-Genome Regression and Prediction Methods Applied to Plant and Animal Breeding [J].
de los Campos, Gustavo ;
Hickey, John M. ;
Pong-Wong, Ricardo ;
Daetwyler, Hans D. ;
Calus, Mario P. L. .
GENETICS, 2013, 193 (02) :327-+