Investigating the impact of preselection on subsequent single-step genomic BLUP evaluation of preselected animals

被引:16
作者
Jibrila, Ibrahim [1 ]
ten Napel, Jan [1 ]
Vandenplas, Jeremie [1 ]
Veerkamp, Roel F. [1 ]
Calus, Mario P. L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Wageningen Univ & Res, Anim Breeding & Genom, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, NL-6708 PB Wageningen, Netherlands
关键词
GENETIC EVALUATIONS; BREEDING SCHEMES; SELECTION; BIAS; POPULATIONS; PREDICTIONS; PARAMETERS; VARIANCE;
D O I
10.1186/s12711-020-00562-6
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Background Preselection of candidates, hereafter referred to as preselection, is a common practice in breeding programs. Preselection can cause bias and accuracy loss in subsequent pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP). However, the impact of preselection on subsequent single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) is not completely clear yet. Therefore, in this study, we investigated, across different heritabilities, the impact of intensity and type of preselection on subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation of preselected animals. Methods We simulated a nucleus of a breeding programme, in which a recent population of 15 generations was produced with PBLUP-based selection. In generation 15 of this recent population, the parents of the next generation were preselected using several preselection scenarios. These scenarios were combinations of three intensities of preselection (no, high or very high preselection) and three types of preselection (genomic, parental average or random), across three heritabilities (0.5, 0.3 or 0.1). Following each preselection scenario, a subsequent evaluation was performed using ssGBLUP by excluding all the information from the preculled animals, and these genetic evaluations were compared in terms of accuracy and bias for the preselected animals, and in terms of realized genetic gain. Results Type of preselection affected selection accuracy at both preselection and subsequent evaluation stages. While preselection accuracy decreased, accuracy in the subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation increased, from genomic to parent average to random preselection scenarios. Bias was always negligible. Genetic gain decreased from genomic to parent average to random preselection scenarios. Genetic gain also decreased with increasing intensity of preselection, but only by a maximum of 0.1 additive genetic standard deviation from no to very high genomic preselection scenarios. Conclusions Using ssGBLUP in subsequent evaluations prevents preselection bias, irrespective of intensity and type of preselection, and heritability. With GPS, in addition to reducing the phenotyping effort considerably, the use of ssGBLUP in subsequent evaluations realizes only a slightly lower genetic gain than that realized without preselection. This is especially the case for traits that are expensive to measure (e.g. feed intake of individual broiler chickens), and traits for which phenotypes can only be measured at advanced stages of life (e.g. litter size in pigs).
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Single-Step Methodology for Genomic Evaluation in Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)
    Abdalla, Emhimad E. A.
    Schenkel, Flavio S.
    Begli, Hakimeh Emamgholi
    Willems, Owen W.
    van As, Pieter
    Vanderhout, Ryley
    Wood, Benjamin J.
    Baes, Christine F.
    FRONTIERS IN GENETICS, 2019, 10
  • [22] Bias of dairy sheep evaluations using BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP with metafounders and unknown parent groups.
    Macedo, F. L.
    Christensen, O. F.
    Astruc, J. M.
    Aguilar, I.
    Masuda, Y.
    Legarra, A.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2020, 103 : 114 - 114
  • [23] Effect of genotyping strategies on the sustained benefit of single-step genomic BLUP over multiple generations
    Sanchez-Mayor, Milagros
    Riggio, Valentina
    Navarro, Pau
    Gutierrez-Gil, Beatriz
    Haley, Chris S.
    De la Fuente, Luis Fernando
    Arranz, Juan-Jose
    Pong-Wong, Ricardo
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2022, 54 (01)
  • [24] Considering dominance in reduced single-step genomic evaluations
    Ertl, J.
    Edel, C.
    Pimentel, E. C. G.
    Emmerling, R.
    Goetz, K-U.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2018, 135 (03) : 151 - 158
  • [25] Weighted single-step genomic BLUP improves accuracy of genomic breeding values for protein content in French dairy goats: a quantitative trait influenced by a major gene
    Teissier, Marc
    Larroque, Helene
    Robert-Granie, Christele
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2018, 50
  • [26] Evaluation of a multi-line broiler chicken population using a single-step genomic evaluation procedure
    Simeone, R.
    Misztal, I.
    Aguilar, I.
    Vitezica, Z. G.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2012, 129 (01) : 3 - 10
  • [27] Single-step SNP-BLUP with on-the-fly imputed genotypes and residual polygenic effects
    Taskinen, Matti
    Mantysaari, Esa A.
    Stranden, Ismo
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2017, 49
  • [28] Comparison of conventional BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP evaluations for yearling weight and carcass traits in Hanwoo beef cattle using single trait and multi-trait models
    Mehrban, Hossein
    Lee, Deuk Hwan
    Naserkheil, Masoumeh
    Moradi, Mohammad Hossein
    Ibanez-Escriche, Noelia
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (10):
  • [29] The impact of truncating data on the predictive ability for single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction
    Howard, Jeremy T.
    Rathje, Tom A.
    Bruns, Caitlyn E.
    Wilson-Wells, Danielle F.
    Kachman, Stephen D.
    Spangler, Matthew L.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2018, 135 (04) : 251 - 262
  • [30] Crossbred evaluations using single-step genomic BLUP and algorithm for proven and young with different sources of data
    Pocrnic, Ivan
    Lourenco, Daniela A. L.
    Chen, Ching-Yi
    Herring, William O.
    Misztal, Ignacy
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2019, 97 (04) : 1513 - 1522