Improving Genomic Prediction of Crossbred and Purebred Dairy Cattle

被引:18
|
作者
Khansefid, Majid [1 ]
Goddard, Michael E. [1 ,2 ]
Haile-Mariam, Mekonnen [1 ]
Konstantinov, Kon, V [3 ]
Schrooten, Chris [4 ]
de Jong, Gerben [4 ]
Jewell, Erica G. [3 ]
O'Connor, Erin [5 ]
Pryce, Jennie E. [1 ,6 ]
Daetwyler, Hans D. [1 ,6 ]
MacLeod, Iona M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Agr Victoria Serv, AgriBio Ctr AgriBiosci, Bundoora, Vic, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Fac Vet & Agr Sci, Parkville, Vic, Australia
[3] DataGene, Bundoora, Vic, Australia
[4] CRV, Arnhem, Netherlands
[5] CRV Ambreed, Hamilton, New Zealand
[6] La Trobe Univ, Sch Appl Syst Biol, Bundoora, Vic, Australia
关键词
genomic prediction; crossbred; multi-breed; dairy cattle; GBLUP; Bayesian; MULTI-BREED; MILK-YIELD; SELECTION; NUCLEOTIDE; HOLSTEIN; RELIABILITY; POPULATION; IMPUTATION; ACCURACY; BULLS;
D O I
10.3389/fgene.2020.598580
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
This study assessed the accuracy and bias of genomic prediction (GP) in purebred Holstein (H) and Jersey (J) as well as crossbred (H and J) validation cows using different reference sets and prediction strategies. The reference sets were made up of different combinations of 36,695 H and J purebreds and crossbreds. Additionally, the effect of using different sets of marker genotypes on GP was studied (conventional panel: 50k, custom panel enriched with, or close to, causal mutations: XT_50k, and conventional high-density with a limited custom set: pruned HDnGBS). We also compared the use of genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and Bayesian (emBayesR) models, and the traits tested were milk, fat, and protein yields. On average, by including crossbred cows in the reference population, the prediction accuracies increased by 0.01-0.08 and were less biased (regression coefficient closer to 1 by 0.02-0.16), and the benefit was greater for crossbreds compared to purebreds. The accuracy of prediction increased by 0.02 using XT_50k compared to 50k genotypes without affecting the bias. Although using pruned HDnGBS instead of 50k also increased the prediction accuracy by about 0.02, it increased the bias for purebred predictions in emBayesR models. Generally, emBayesR outperformed GBLUP for prediction accuracy when using 50k or pruned HDnGBS genotypes, but the benefits diminished with XT_50k genotypes. Crossbred predictions derived from a joint pure H and J reference were similar in accuracy to crossbred predictions derived from the two separate purebred reference sets and combined proportional to breed composition. However, the latter approach was less biased by 0.13. Most interestingly, using an equalized breed reference instead of an H-dominated reference, on average, reduced the bias of prediction by 0.16-0.19 and increased the accuracy by 0.04 for crossbred and J cows, with a little change in the H accuracy. In conclusion, we observed improved genomic predictions for both crossbreds and purebreds by equalizing breed contributions in a mixed breed reference that included crossbred cows. Furthermore, we demonstrate, that compared to the conventional 50k or high-density panels, our customized set of 50k sequence markers improved or matched the prediction accuracy and reduced bias with both GBLUP and Bayesian models.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Genomic predictions for crossbred dairy cattle
    VanRaden, P. M.
    Tooker, M. E.
    Chud, T. C. S.
    Norman, H. D.
    Megonigal, J. H., Jr.
    Haagen, I. W.
    Wiggans, G. R.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2020, 103 (02) : 1620 - 1631
  • [2] Comparing genomic prediction accuracy from purebred, crossbred and combined purebred and crossbred reference populations in sheep
    Moghaddar, Nasir
    Swan, Andrew A.
    van der Werf, Julius H. J.
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2014, 46
  • [3] Comprehensive selection signature analyses in dairy cattle exploiting purebred and crossbred genomic data
    Nayak, Sonali Sonejita
    Panigrahi, Manjit
    Rajawat, Divya
    Ghildiyal, Kanika
    Sharma, Anurodh
    Parida, Subhashree
    Bhushan, Bharat
    Mishra, B. P.
    Dutt, Triveni
    MAMMALIAN GENOME, 2023, 34 (04) : 615 - 631
  • [4] Genomic prediction based on a joint reference population for the Xinjiang Brown cattle
    Zhang, Menghua
    Xu, Lei
    Lu, Haibo
    Luo, Hanpeng
    Zhou, Jinghang
    Wang, Dan
    Zhang, Xiaoxue
    Huang, Xixia
    Wang, Yachun
    FRONTIERS IN GENETICS, 2024, 15
  • [5] Genomic prediction of crossbred dairy cattle in Tanzania: A route to productivity gains in smallholder dairy systems
    Mrode, R.
    Ojango, J.
    Ekine-Dzivenu, C.
    Aliloo, H.
    Gibson, J.
    Okeyo, M. A.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2021, 104 (11) : 11779 - 11789
  • [6] Review: How to improve genomic predictions in small dairy cattle populations
    Lund, M. S.
    van den Berg, I.
    Ma, P.
    Brondum, R. F.
    Su, G.
    ANIMAL, 2016, 10 (06) : 1042 - 1049
  • [7] Optimizing genomic prediction for Australian Red dairy cattle
    van den Berg, I.
    MacLeod, I. M.
    Reich, C. M.
    Breen, E. J.
    Pryce, J. E.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2020, 103 (07) : 6276 - 6298
  • [8] Comparing genomic prediction accuracy from purebred, crossbred and combined purebred and crossbred reference populations in sheep
    Nasir Moghaddar
    Andrew A Swan
    Julius HJ van der Werf
    Genetics Selection Evolution, 46
  • [9] Genomic prediction of crossbred performance based on purebred Landrace and Yorkshire data using a dominance model
    Esfandyari, Hadi
    Bijma, Piter
    Henryon, Mark
    Christensen, Ole Fredslund
    Sorensen, Anders Christian
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2016, 48
  • [10] Improving the accuracy of genomic prediction in dairy cattle using the biologically annotated neural networks framework
    Wang, Xue
    Shi, Shaolei
    Khan, Md. Yousuf Ali
    Zhang, Zhe
    Zhang, Yi
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE AND BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2024, 15 (01)