Factors affecting GEBV accuracy with single-step Bayesian models

被引:10
作者
Zhou, Lei [1 ]
Mrode, Raphael [2 ]
Zhang, Shengli [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Zhang, Qin [1 ]
Li, Bugao [3 ]
Liu, Jian-Feng [1 ]
机构
[1] China Agr Univ, Coll Anim Sci & Technol, Minist Agr, Natl Engn Lab Anim Breeding,Key Lab Anim Genet Br, Beijing 100193, Peoples R China
[2] Int Livestock Inst, Anim Biosci, Nairobi 00100, Kenya
[3] Shanxi Agr Univ, Dept Anim Sci & Vet Med, Taigu 030801, Peoples R China
基金
国家高技术研究发展计划(863计划);
关键词
GENETIC-RELATIONSHIP INFORMATION; GENOMIC RELATIONSHIP MATRIX; BREEDING VALUES; FULL PEDIGREE; PREDICTION; SELECTION; POPULATIONS; STRATEGIES; CHICKENS; INVERSE;
D O I
10.1038/s41437-017-0010-9
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
A single-step approach to obtain genomic prediction was first proposed in 2009. Many studies have investigated the components of GEBV accuracy in genomic selection. However, it is still unclear how the population structure and the relationships between training and validation populations influence GEBV accuracy in terms of single-step analysis. Here, we explored the components of GEBV accuracy in single-step Bayesian analysis with a simulation study. Three scenarios with various numbers of QTL (5, 50, and 500) were simulated. Three models were implemented to analyze the simulated data: single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP; SSGBLUP), single-step BayesA (SS-BayesA), and single-step BayesB (SS-BayesB). According to our results, GEBV accuracy was influenced by the relationships between the training and validation populations more significantly for ungenotyped animals than for genotyped animals. SS-BayesA/BayesB showed an obvious advantage over SSGBLUP with the scenarios of 5 and 50 QTL. SS-BayesB model obtained the lowest accuracy with the 500 QTL in the simulation. SS-BayesA model was the most efficient and robust considering all QTL scenarios. Generally, both the relationships between training and validation populations and LD between markers and QTL contributed to GEBV accuracy in the single-step analysis, and the advantages of single-step Bayesian models were more apparent when the trait is controlled by fewer QTL.
引用
收藏
页码:100 / 109
页数:10
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]   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
[2]   Genome-wide marker-assisted selection combining all pedigree phenotypic information with genotypic data in one step: An example using broiler chickens [J].
Chen, C. Y. ;
Misztal, I. ;
Aguilar, I. ;
Tsuruta, S. ;
Meuwissen, T. H. E. ;
Aggrey, S. E. ;
Wing, T. ;
Muir, W. M. .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2011, 89 (01) :23-28
[3]   Impact of Genotype Imputation on the Performance of GBLUP and Bayesian Methods for Genomic Prediction [J].
Chen, Liuhong ;
Li, Changxi ;
Sargolzaei, Mehdi ;
Schenkel, Flavio .
PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (07)
[4]   Single-step methods for genomic evaluation in pigs [J].
Christensen, O. F. ;
Madsen, P. ;
Nielsen, B. ;
Ostersen, T. ;
Su, G. .
ANIMAL, 2012, 6 (10) :1565-1571
[5]   Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped [J].
Christensen, Ole F. ;
Lund, Mogens S. .
GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2010, 42
[6]   Components of the accuracy of genomic prediction in a multi-breed sheep population [J].
Daetwyler, H. D. ;
Kemper, K. E. ;
van der Werf, J. H. J. ;
Hayes, B. J. .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2012, 90 (10) :3375-3384
[7]   Computational strategies for alternative single-step Bayesian regression models with large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals [J].
Fernando, Rohan L. ;
Cheng, Hao ;
Golden, Bruce L. ;
Garrick, Dorian J. .
GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2016, 48
[8]   A class of Bayesian methods to combine large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals for whole-genome analyses [J].
Fernando, Rohan L. ;
Dekkers, Jack C. M. ;
Garrick, Dorian J. .
GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2014, 46
[9]  
Fernando Rohan L, 2013, Methods Mol Biol, V1019, P237, DOI 10.1007/978-1-62703-447-0_10
[10]   Additive Genetic Variability and the Bayesian Alphabet [J].
Gianola, Daniel ;
de los Campos, Gustavo ;
Hill, William G. ;
Manfredi, Eduardo ;
Fernando, Rohan .
GENETICS, 2009, 183 (01) :347-363