Applicability of single-step genomic evaluation with a random regression model for reproductive traits in turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)

被引:3
作者
Makanjuola, Bayode O. O. [1 ]
Abdalla, Emhimad A. A. [1 ]
Wood, Benjamin J. J. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Baes, Christine F. F. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Guelph, Ctr Genom Improvement Livestock, Dept Anim Biosci, Guelph, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Vet Sci, Gatton, Qld, Australia
[3] Hybrid Turkeys, Kitchener, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Bern, Inst Genet, Vetsuisse Fac, Bern, Switzerland
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
pedigree and genomics; random regression analysis; hatchability; fertility; turkeys; MONTHLY EGG-PRODUCTION; GENETIC EVALUATION; FULL PEDIGREE; LAYING HENS; PARAMETERS; HATCHABILITY; INHERITANCE; FERTILITY; LACTATION; CHICKENS;
D O I
10.3389/fgene.2022.923766
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
Fertility and hatchability are economically important traits due to their effect on poult output coming from the turkey hatchery. Traditionally, fertility is recorded as the number of fertile eggs set in the incubator (FERT), defined at a time point during incubation by the identification of a developing embryo. Hatchability is recorded as either the number of fertile eggs that hatched (hatch of fertile, HOF) or the number hatched from all the eggs set (hatch of set, HOS). These traits are collected throughout the productive life of the bird and are conventionally cumulated, resulting in each bird having a single record per trait. Genetic evaluations of these traits have been estimated using pedigree relationships. However, the longitudinal nature of the traits and the availability of genomic information have renewed interest in using random regression (RR) to capture the differences in repeatedly recorded traits, as well as in the incorporation of genomic relationships. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: 1) to compare the applicability of a RR model with a cumulative model (CUM) using both pedigree and genomic information for genetic evaluation of FERT, HOF, and HOS and 2) to estimate and compare predictability from the models. For this study, a total of 63,935 biweekly FERT, HOF, and HOS records from 7,211 hens mated to 1,524 toms were available for a maternal turkey line. In total, 4,832 animals had genotypic records, and pedigree information on 11,191 animals was available. Estimated heritability from the CUM model using pedigree information was 0.11 & PLUSMN; 0.02, 0.24 & PLUSMN; 0.02, and 0.24 & PLUSMN; 0.02 for FERT, HOF, and HOS, respectively. With random regression using pedigree relationships, heritability estimates were in the range of 0.04-0.09, 0.11-0.17, and 0.09-0.18 for FERT, HOF, and HOS, respectively. The incorporation of genomic information increased the heritability by an average of 28 and 23% for CUM and RR models, respectively. In addition, the incorporation of genomic information caused predictability to increase by approximately 11 and 7% for HOF and HOS, respectively; however, a decrease in predictability of about 12% was observed for FERT. Our findings suggest that RR models using pedigree and genomic relationships simultaneously will achieve a higher predictability than the traditional CUM model.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   Single-Step Methodology for Genomic Evaluation in Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) [J].
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
[2]   Hot topic: A unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score [J].
Aguilar, I. ;
Misztal, I. ;
Johnson, D. L. ;
Legarra, A. ;
Tsuruta, S. ;
Lawlor, T. J. .
JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2010, 93 (02) :743-752
[3]  
Akaike H., 1998, 2 INT S INF THEOR, P199, DOI [DOI 10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-015, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_15]
[4]   Monthly model for genetic evaluation of laying hens -: II.: Random regression [J].
Anang, A ;
Mielenz, N ;
Schüler, L .
BRITISH POULTRY SCIENCE, 2002, 43 (03) :384-390
[5]   Genetic and phenotypic parameters for monthly egg production in White Leghorn hens [J].
Anang, A ;
Mielenz, N ;
Schüler, L .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR TIERZUCHTUNG UND ZUCHTUNGSBIOLOGIE, 2000, 117 (06) :407-415
[6]   Modelling lactation curves of dairy goats by fitting random regression models using Legendre polynomials or B-splines [J].
Brito, L. F. ;
Silva, F. G. ;
Oliveira, H. R. ;
Souza, N. O. ;
Caetano, G. C. ;
Costa, E. V. ;
Menezes, G. R. O. ;
Melo, A. L. P. ;
Rodrigues, M. T. ;
Torres, R. A. .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2018, 98 (01) :73-83
[7]   Genotype x environment interaction as it relates to egg production in turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) [J].
Case, L. A. ;
Kelly, M. J. ;
Miller, S. P. ;
Wood, B. J. .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2010, 88 (06) :1957-1966
[8]  
Case L.A., 2011, THESIS GUELPH U
[9]   Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped [J].
Christensen, Ole F. ;
Lund, Mogens S. .
GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2010, 42
[10]   GENETIC INFLUENCES ON SEASONAL DECLINE IN THE FERTILITY OF FEMALE TURKEYS [J].
DUNNINGTON, EA ;
VANKREY, HP ;
HULET, RM ;
DENBOW, DM .
POULTRY SCIENCE, 1990, 69 (03) :365-368