Dataset Information

Accuracy of Predicted Genomic Breeding Values in Purebred and Crossbred Pigs.

ABSTRACT: Genomic selection has been widely implemented in dairy cattle breeding when the aim is to improve performance of purebred animals. In pigs, however, the final product is a crossbred animal. This may affect the efficiency of methods that are currently implemented for dairy cattle. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of predicted breeding values in crossbred pigs using purebred genomic and phenotypic data. A second objective was to compare the predictive ability of SNPs when training is done in either single or multiple populations for four traits: age at first insemination (AFI); total number of piglets born (TNB); litter birth weight (LBW); and litter variation (LVR). We performed marker-based and pedigree-based predictions. Within-population predictions for the four traits ranged from 0.21 to 0.72. Multi-population prediction yielded accuracies ranging from 0.18 to 0.67. Predictions across purebred populations as well as predicting genetic merit of crossbreds from their purebred parental lines for AFI performed poorly (not significantly different from zero). In contrast, accuracies of across-population predictions and accuracies of purebred to crossbred predictions for LBW and LVR ranged from 0.08 to 0.31 and 0.11 to 0.31, respectively. Accuracy for TNB was zero for across-population prediction, whereas for purebred to crossbred prediction it ranged from 0.08 to 0.22. In general, marker-based outperformed pedigree-based prediction across populations and traits. However, in some cases pedigree-based prediction performed similarly or outperformed marker-based prediction. There was predictive ability when purebred populations were used to predict crossbred genetic merit using an additive model in the populations studied. AFI was the only exception, indicating that predictive ability depends largely on the genetic correlation between PB and CB performance, which was 0.31 for AFI. Multi-population prediction was no better than within-population prediction for the purebred validation set. Accuracy of prediction was very trait-dependent.

SUBMITTER: Hidalgo AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4528314 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accuracy of Predicted Genomic Breeding Values in Purebred and Crossbred Pigs.

Hidalgo André M AM Bastiaansen John W M JW Lopes Marcos S MS Harlizius Barbara B Groenen Martien A M MA de Koning Dirk-Jan DJ

G3 (Bethesda, Md.) 20150526 8

Genomic selection has been widely implemented in dairy cattle breeding when the aim is to improve performance of purebred animals. In pigs, however, the final product is a crossbred animal. This may affect the efficiency of methods that are currently implemented for dairy cattle. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of predicted breeding values in crossbred pigs using purebred genomic and phenotypic data. A second objective was to compare the predictive ability of ...[more]

PMID: 26019187

Similar Datasets

Project description:INGA FOOD S. A., as a Spanish company that produces and commercializes fattened pigs, has produced a hybrid Iberian sow called CASTÚA by crossing the Retinto and Entrepelado varieties. The selection of the parental populations is based on selection criteria calculated from purebred information, under the assumption that the genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performance is high; however, these correlations can be less than one because of a GxE interaction or the presence of non-additive genetic effects. This study estimated the additive and dominance variances of the purebred and crossbred populations for litter size, and calculated the additive genetic correlations between the purebred and crossbred performances. The dataset consisted of 2030 litters from the Entrepelado population, 1977 litters from the Retinto population, and 1958 litters from the crossbred population. The individuals were genotyped with a GeneSeek® GGP Porcine70K HDchip. The model of analysis was a 'biological' multivariate mixed model that included additive and dominance SNP effects. The estimates of the additive genotypic variance for the total number born (TNB) were 0.248, 0.282 and 0.546 for the Entrepelado, Retinto and Crossbred populations, respectively. The estimates of the dominance genotypic variances were 0.177, 0.172 and 0.262 for the Entrepelado, Retinto and Crossbred populations. The results for the number born alive (NBA) were similar. The genetic correlations between the purebred and crossbred performance for TNB and NBA-between the brackets-were 0.663 in the Entrepelado and 0.881 in Retinto poplulations. After backsolving to obtain estimates of the SNP effects, the additive genetic variance associated with genomic regions containing 30 SNPs was estimated, and we identified four genomic regions that each explained > 2% of the additive genetic variance in chromosomes (SSC) 6, 8 and 12: one region in SSC6, two regions in SSC8, and one region in SSC12.

Project description:In crossbreeding programs, various genomic prediction models have been proposed for using phenotypic records of crossbred animals to increase the selection response for crossbred performance in purebred animals. A possible model is a model that assumes identical single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) effects for the crossbred performance trait across breeds (ASGM). Another model is a genomic model that assumes breed-specific effects of SNP alleles (BSAM) for crossbred performance. The aim of this study was to derive and validate equations for predicting the reliability of estimated genomic breeding values for crossbred performance in both these models. Prediction equations were derived for situations when all (phenotyping and) genotyping data have already been collected, i.e. based on the genetic evaluation model, and for situations when all genotyping data are not yet available, i.e. when designing breeding programs.When all genotyping data are available, prediction equations are based on selection index theory. Without availability of all genotyping data, prediction equations are based on population parameters (e.g., heritability of the traits involved, genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performance, effective number of chromosome segments). Validation of the equations for predicting the reliability of genomic breeding values without all genotyping data was performed based on simulated data of a two-way crossbreeding program, using either two closely-related breeds, or two unrelated breeds, to produce crossbred animals. The proposed equations can be used for an easy comparison of the reliability of genomic estimated breeding values across many scenarios, especially if all genotyping data are available. We show that BSAM outperforms ASGM for a specific breed, if the effective number of chromosome segments that originate from this breed and are shared by selection candidates of this breed and crossbred reference animals is less than half the effective number of all chromosome segments that are independently segregating in the same animals.The derived equations can be used to predict the reliability of genomic estimated breeding values for crossbred performance using ASGM or BSAM in many scenarios, and are thus useful to optimize the design of breeding programs. Scenarios can vary in terms of the genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performances, heritabilities, number of reference animals, or distance between breeds.

Project description:Genomic selection has the potential to increase genetic progress. Genotype imputation of high-density single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes can improve the cost efficiency of genomic breeding value (GEBV) prediction for pig breeding. Consequently, the objectives of this work were to: (1) estimate accuracy of genomic evaluation and GEBV for three traits in a Yorkshire population and (2) quantify the loss of accuracy of genomic evaluation and GEBV when genotypes were imputed under two scenarios: a high-cost, high-accuracy scenario in which only selection candidates were imputed from a low-density platform and a low-cost, low-accuracy scenario in which all animals were imputed using a small reference panel of haplotypes. Phenotypes and genotypes obtained with the PorcineSNP60 BeadChip were available for 983 Yorkshire boars. Genotypes of selection candidates were masked and imputed using tagSNP in the GeneSeek Genomic Profiler (10K). Imputation was performed with BEAGLE using 128 or 1800 haplotypes as reference panels. GEBV were obtained through an animal-centric ridge regression model using de-regressed breeding values as response variables. Accuracy of genomic evaluation was estimated as the correlation between estimated breeding values and GEBV in a 10-fold cross validation design. Accuracy of genomic evaluation using observed genotypes was high for all traits (0.65-0.68). Using genotypes imputed from a large reference panel (accuracy: R(2) = 0.95) for genomic evaluation did not significantly decrease accuracy, whereas a scenario with genotypes imputed from a small reference panel (R(2) = 0.88) did show a significant decrease in accuracy. Genomic evaluation based on imputed genotypes in selection candidates can be implemented at a fraction of the cost of a genomic evaluation using observed genotypes and still yield virtually the same accuracy. On the other side, using a very small reference panel of haplotypes to impute training animals and candidates for selection results in lower accuracy of genomic evaluation.

Project description: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.

Project description:BackgroundThe two main genetic types in Iberian pig production show important phenotypic differences in growth, fattening and tissue composition since early developmental stages. The objective of this work was the evaluation of muscle transcriptome profile in piglets of both genetic types, in order to identify genes, pathways and regulatory factors responsible for their phenotypic differences. Contemporary families coming from pure Iberian pigs (IB) or from crossing with Duroc boars (DU×IB) were generated. Piglets (14 from each genetic type) were slaughtered at weaning (28 days) and longissimus dorsi was sampled for composition and gene expression studies. RNA was obtained and hybridized to Affymetrix Porcine Genechip expression arrays.ResultsLoin muscle chemical composition showed significant differences between genetic types in intramuscular fat content (6.1% vs. 4.3% in IB and DUxIB animals, respectively, P = 0.009) and in saturated (P = 0.019) and monounsaturated fatty acid proportions (P = 0.044). The statistical analysis of gene expression data allowed the identification of 256 differentially expressed (DE) genes between genetic types (FDR < 0.10), 102 upregulated in IB and 154 upregulated in DU×IB. Transcript differences were validated for a subset of DE genes by qPCR. We observed alteration in biological functions related to extracellular matrix function and organization, cellular adhesion, muscle growth, lipid metabolism and proteolysis. Candidate genes with known effects on muscle growth were found among the DE genes upregulated in DU×IB. Genes related to lipid metabolism and proteolysis were found among those upregulated in IB. Regulatory factors (RF) potentially involved in the expression differences were identified by calculating the regulatory impact factors. Twenty-nine RF were found, some of them with known relationship with tissue development (MSTN, SIX4, IRX3), adipogenesis (CEBPD, PPARGC1B), or extracellular matrix processes (MAX, MXI1). Correlation among the expression of these RF and DE genes show relevant differences between genetic types.ConclusionThese results provide valuable information about genetic mechanisms determining the phenotypic differences on growth and meat quality between the genetic types studied, mainly related to the development and function of the extracellular matrix and also to some metabolic processes as proteolysis and lipid metabolism. Transcription factors and regulatory mechanisms are proposed for these altered biological functions.

Project description:Intensive selection raises the efficiency of pig farming considerably, but it also promotes the accumulation of homozygosity, which can lead to an increase in inbreeding and the accumulation of deleterious variation. The analysis of segments homozygous-by-descent (HBD) and non-HBD segments in purebred and crossbred pigs is of great interest. Research was carried out on 657 pigs, of which there were Large White (LW, n = 280), Landrace (LR, n = 218) and F1 female (♂LR × ♀LW) (F1, n = 159). Genotyping was performed using the GeneSeek® GGP Porcine HD Genomic Profiler v1 (Illumina Inc., USA). To identify HBD segments and estimate autozygosity (inbreeding coefficient), we used the multiple HBD classes model. LW pigs exhibited 50,420 HBD segments, an average of 180 per animal; LR pigs exhibited 33,586 HBD segments, an average of 154 per animal; F1 pigs exhibited 21,068 HBD segments, an average of 132 per animal. The longest HBD segments in LW were presented in SSC1, SSC13 and SSC15; in LR, in SSC1; and in F1, in SSC15. In these segments, 3898 SNPs localized in 1252 genes were identified. These areas overlap with 441 QTLs (SSC1-238 QTLs; SSC13-101 QTLs; and SSC15-102 QTLs), including 174 QTLs for meat and carcass traits (84 QTLs-fatness), 127 QTLs for reproduction traits (100 QTLs-litter traits), 101 for production traits (69 QTLs-growth and 30 QTLs-feed intake), 21 QTLs for exterior traits (9 QTLs-conformation) and 18 QTLs for health traits (13 QTLs-blood parameters). Thirty SNPs were missense variants. Whilst estimating the potential for deleterious variation, six SNPs localized in the NEDD4, SEC11C, DCP1A, CCT8, PKP4 and TENM3 genes were identified, which may show deleterious variation. A high frequency of potential deleterious variation was noted for LR in DCP1A, and for LW in TENM3 and PKP4. In all cases, the genotype frequencies in F1 were intermediate between LR and LW. The findings presented in our work show the promise of genome scanning for HBD as a strategy for studying population history, identifying genomic regions and genes associated with important economic traits, as well as deleterious variation.

Project description:A variety of statistical methods, such as admixture models, have been used to estimate genomic breed composition (GBC). These methods, however, tend to produce non-zero components to reference breeds that shared some genomic similarity with a test animal. These non-essential GBC components, in turn, offset the estimated GBC for the breed to which it belongs. As a result, not all purebred animals have 100% GBC of their respective breeds, which statistically indicates an elevated false-negative rate in the identification of purebred animals with 100% GBC as the cutoff. Otherwise, a lower cutoff of estimated GBC will have to be used, which is arbitrary, and the results are less interpretable. In the present study, three admixture models with regularization were proposed, which produced sparse solutions through suppressing the noise in the estimated GBC due to genomic similarities. The regularization or penalty forms included the L1 norm penalty, minimax concave penalty (MCP), and smooth clipped absolute deviation (SCAD). The performances of these regularized admixture models on the estimation of GBC were examined in purebred and composite animals, respectively, and compared to that of the non-regularized admixture model as the baseline model. The results showed that, given optimal values for ?, the three sparsely regularized admixture models had higher power and thus reduced the false-negative rate for the breed identification of purebred animals than the non-regularized admixture model. Of the three regularized admixture models, the two with a non-convex penalty outperformed the one with L1 norm penalty. In the Brangus, a composite cattle breed, estimated GBC were roughly comparable among the four admixture models, but all the four models underestimated the GBC for these composite animals when non-ancestral breeds were included as the reference. In conclusion, the admixture models with sparse regularization gave more parsimonious, consistent and interpretable results of estimated GBC for purebred animals than the non-regularized admixture model. Nevertheless, the utility of regularized admixture models for estimating GBC in crossbred or composite animals needs to be taken with caution.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of Predicted Genomic Breeding Values in Purebred and Crossbred Pigs.

Publications

Accuracy of Predicted Genomic Breeding Values in Purebred and Crossbred Pigs.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets