Genomic prediction using different estimation methodology, blending and cross-validation techniques for growth traits and visual scores in Hereford and Braford cattle

被引:13
作者
Campos, Gabriel Soares [1 ]
Reimann, Fernando Antonio [1 ]
Cardoso, Leandro Lunardini [2 ]
Ranquetat Ferreira, Carlos Eduardo [3 ]
Junqueira, Vinicius Silva [4 ]
Schmidt, Patricia Iana [1 ]
Braccini Neto, Jose [5 ]
Iti Yokoo, Marcos Jun [2 ]
Sollero, Bruna Pena [2 ]
Boligon, Arione Augusti [1 ]
Cardoso, Fernando Flores [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Pelotas, Dept Zootecnia, BR-96010900 Pelotas, RS, Brazil
[2] Embrapa Pecuaria Sul, BR-96401970 Bage, RS, Brazil
[3] Univ Fed Pelotas, Fac Med Vet, BR-96010900 Pelotas, RS, Brazil
[4] Univ Fed Vicosa, Dept Zootecnia, BR-36570000 Vicosa, MG, Brazil
[5] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Dept Zootecnia, BR-91540000 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
关键词
accuracy prediction; beef cattle; genomic selection; visual evaluation; weight gain; NON-GENOTYPED ANIMALS; GENETIC EVALUATION; BREEDING VALUES; FULL PEDIGREE; TICK RESISTANCE; LARGE NUMBERS; ANGUS CATTLE; BEEF-CATTLE; INFORMATION; POPULATIONS;
D O I
10.1093/jas/sky175
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
The objective of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy and bias of direct and blended genomic predictions using different methods and cross-validation techniques for growth traits (weight and weight gains) and visual scores (conformation, precocity, muscling, and size) obtained at weaning and at yearling in Hereford and Braford breeds. Phenotypic data contained 126,290 animals belonging to the Delta G Connection genetic improvement program, and a set of 3,545 animals genotyped with the 50K chip and 131 sires with the 777K. After quality control, 41,045 markers remained for all animals. An animal model was used to estimate (co) variance components and to predict breeding values, which were later used to calculate the deregressed estimated breeding values (DEBV). Animals with genotype and phenotype for the traits studied were divided into 4 or 5 groups by random and k-means clustering cross-validation strategies. The values of accuracy of the direct genomic values (DGV) were moderate to high magnitude for at weaning and at yearling traits, ranging from 0.19 to 0.45 for the k-means and 0.23 to 0.78 for random clustering among all traits. The greatest gain in relation to the pedigree BLUP (PBLUP) was 9.5% with the BayesB method with both the k-means and the random clustering. Blended genomic value accuracies ranged from 0.19 to 0.56 for k-means and from 0.21 to 0.82 for random clustering. The analyses using the historical pedigree and phenotypes contributed additional information to calculate the GEBV, and in general, the largest gains were for the single-step (ssGBLUP) method in bivariate analyses with a mean increase of 43.00% among all traits measured at weaning and of 46.27% for those evaluated at yearling. The accuracy values for the marker effects estimation methods were lower for k-means clustering, indicating that the training set relationship to the selection candidates is a major factor affecting accuracy of genomic predictions. The gains in accuracy obtained with genomic blending methods, mainly ssGBLUP in bivariate analyses, indicate that genomic predictions should be used as a tool to improve genetic gains in relation to the traditional PBLUP selection.
引用
收藏
页码:2579 / 2595
页数:17
相关论文
共 42 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]  
Aguilar I., 2014, PREGSF90
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2013, The R Project for Statistical Computing
[4]   Tick resistance genetic parameters and its correlations with production traits in Hereford and Braford cattle [J].
Biegelmeyer, Patricia ;
Gulias-Gomes, Claudia Cristina ;
Roso, Vanerlei Mozaquatro ;
Laurino Dionello, Nelson Jose ;
Cardoso, Fernando Flores .
LIVESTOCK SCIENCE, 2017, 202 :96-100
[5]   Accuracies of estimated breeding values from ordinary genetic evaluations do not reflect the correlation between true and estimated breeding values in selected populations [J].
Bijma, P. .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2012, 129 (05) :345-358
[6]   Genomic predictions in Angus cattle: Comparisons of sample size, response variables, and clustering methods for cross-validation [J].
Boddhireddy, P. ;
Kelly, M. J. ;
Northcutt, S. ;
Prayaga, K. C. ;
Rumph, J. ;
DeNise, S. .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2014, 92 (02) :485-497
[7]   Genomic prediction for tick resistance in Braford and Hereford cattle [J].
Cardoso, F. F. ;
Gomes, C. C. G. ;
Sollero, B. P. ;
Oliveira, M. M. ;
Roso, V. M. ;
Piccoli, M. L. ;
Higa, R. H. ;
Yokoo, M. J. ;
Caetano, A. R. ;
Aguilar, I. .
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2015, 93 (06) :2693-2705
[8]  
Cardoso FF, 2004, J ANIM SCI, V82, P1589
[9]   Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped [J].
Christensen, Ole F. ;
Lund, Mogens S. .
GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2010, 42
[10]  
de Mattos D, 2000, J ANIM SCI, V78, P33