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
  • [41] Single-step genomic evaluation of milk production traits in Canadian Alpine and Saanen dairy goats
    Massender, Erin
    Brito, Luiz F.
    Maignel, Laurence
    Oliveira, Hinayah R.
    Jafarikia, Mohsen
    Baes, Christine F.
    Sullivan, Brian
    Schenkel, Flavio S.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2022, 105 (03) : 2393 - 2407
  • [42] Use of a single-step approach for integrating foreign information into national genomic evaluation in Holstein cattle
    Guarini, A. R.
    Lourenco, D. A. L.
    Brito, L. F.
    Sargolzaei, M.
    Baes, C. F.
    Miglior, F.
    Tsuruta, S.
    Misztal, I
    Schenkel, F. S.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2019, 102 (09) : 8175 - 8183
  • [43] Reducing bias in the dairy cattle single-step genomic evaluation by ignoring bulls without progeny
    Koivula, M.
    Stranden, I.
    Aamand, G. P.
    Mantysaari, E. A.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2018, 135 (02) : 107 - 115
  • [44] A single-step genomic model with direct estimation of marker effects
    Liu, Z.
    Goddard, M. E.
    Reinhardt, F.
    Reents, R.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2014, 97 (09) : 5833 - 5850
  • [45] Comparison of models for missing pedigree in single-step genomic prediction
    Masuda, Yutaka
    Tsuruta, Shogo
    Bermann, Matias
    Bradford, Heather L.
    Misztal, Ignacy
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2021, 99 (02)
  • [46] Application of single-step genomic evaluation using social genetic effect model for growth in pig
    Hong, Joon Ki
    Kim, Young Sin
    Cho, Kyu Ho
    Lee, Deuk Hwan
    Min, Ye Jin
    Cho, Eun Seok
    ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, 2019, 32 (12): : 1836 - 1843
  • [47] Short communication: The role of genotypes from animals without phenotypes in single-step genomic evaluations
    Shabalina, T.
    Pimentel, E. C. G.
    Edel, C.
    Plieschke, L.
    Emmerling, R.
    Goetz, K. -U.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2017, 100 (10) : 8277 - 8281
  • [48] Single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) effectively models small cattle populations: lessons from the Israeli-Holstein Herdbook
    Curzon, Arie Yehuda
    Ezra, Ephraim
    Weller, Joel Ira
    Seroussi, Eyal
    Borner, Vinzent
    Gershoni, Moran
    BMC GENOMICS, 2024, 25 (01):
  • [49] Single-step genomic evaluation using multitrait random regression model and test-day data
    Koivula, M.
    Stranden, I.
    Poso, J.
    Aamand, G. P.
    Mantysaari, E. A.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2015, 98 (04) : 2775 - 2784
  • [50] Genomic prediction in a nuclear population of layers using single-step models
    Yan, Yiyuan
    Wu, Guiqin
    Liu, Aiqiao
    Sun, Congjiao
    Han, Wenpeng
    Li, Guangqi
    Yang, Ning
    POULTRY SCIENCE, 2018, 97 (02) : 397 - 402