Dataset Information

Effects of alleles in crossbred pigs estimated for genomic prediction depend on their breed-of-origin.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study investigated if the allele effect of a given single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) for crossbred performance in pigs estimated in a genomic prediction model differs depending on its breed-of-origin, and how these are related to estimated effects for purebred performance.

Results

SNP-allele substitution effects were estimated for a commonly used SNP panel using a genomic best linear unbiased prediction model with breed-specific partial relationship matrices. Estimated breeding values for purebred and crossbred performance were converted to SNP-allele effects by breed-of-origin. Differences between purebred and crossbred, and between breeds-of-origin were evaluated by comparing percentage of variance explained by genomic regions for back fat thickness (BF), average daily gain (ADG), and residual feed intake (RFI). From ten regions explaining most additive genetic variance for crossbred performance, 1 to 5 regions also appeared in the top ten for purebred performance. The proportion of genetic variance explained by a genomic region and the estimated effect of a haplotype in such a region were different depending upon the breed-of-origin. To illustrate underlying mechanisms, we evaluated the estimated effects across breeds-of-origin for haplotypes associated to the melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R) gene, and for the MC4Rsnp itself which is a missense mutation with a known effect on BF and ADG. Although estimated allele substitution effects of the MC4Rsnp mutation were very similar across breeds, explained genetic variance of haplotypes associated to the MC4R gene using a SNP panel that does not include the mutation, was considerably lower in one of the breeds where the allele frequency of the mutation was the lowest.

Conclusions

Similar regions explaining similar additive genetic variance were observed across purebred and crossbred performance. Moreover, there was some overlap across breeds-of-origin between regions that explained relatively large proportions of genetic variance for crossbred performance; albeit that the actual proportion of variance deviated across breeds-of-origin. Results based on a missense mutation in MC4R confirmed that even if a causal locus has similar effects across breeds-of-origin, estimated effects and explained variance in its region using a commonly used SNP panel can strongly depend on the allele frequency of the underlying causal mutation.

SUBMITTER: Sevillano CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6180412 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of alleles in crossbred pigs estimated for genomic prediction depend on their breed-of-origin.

Sevillano Claudia A CA Ten Napel Jan J Guimarães Simone E F SEF Silva Fabyano F FF Calus Mario P L MPL

BMC genomics 20181011 1

<h4>Background</h4>This study investigated if the allele effect of a given single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) for crossbred performance in pigs estimated in a genomic prediction model differs depending on its breed-of-origin, and how these are related to estimated effects for purebred performance.<h4>Results</h4>SNP-allele substitution effects were estimated for a commonly used SNP panel using a genomic best linear unbiased prediction model with breed-specific partial relationship matrices. Es ...[more]

PMID: 30305017

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecently, crossbred animals have begun to be used as parents in the next generations of dairy and beef cattle systems, which has increased the interest in predicting the genetic merit of those animals. The primary objective of this study was to investigate three available methods for genomic prediction of crossbred animals. In the first two methods, SNP effects from within-breed evaluations are used by weighting them by the average breed proportions across the genome (BPM method) or by their breed-of-origin (BOM method). The third method differs from the BOM in that it estimates breed-specific SNP effects using purebred and crossbred data, considering the breed-of-origin of alleles (BOA method). For within-breed evaluations, and thus for BPM and BOM, 5948 Charolais, 6771 Limousin and 7552 Others (a combined population of other breeds) were used to estimate SNP effects separately within each breed. For the BOA, the purebreds' data were enhanced with data from ~ 4K, ~ 8K or ~ 18K crossbred animals. For each animal, its predictor of genetic merit (PGM) was estimated by considering the breed-specific SNP effects. Predictive ability and absence of bias were estimated for crossbreds and the Limousin and Charolais animals. Predictive ability was measured as the correlation between PGM and the adjusted phenotype, while the regression of the adjusted phenotype on PGM was estimated as a measure of bias.ResultsWith BPM and BOM, the predictive abilities for crossbreds were 0.468 and 0.472, respectively, and with the BOA method, they ranged from 0.490 to 0.510. The performance of the BOA method improved as the number of crossbred animals in the reference increased and with the use of the correlated approach, in which the correlation of SNP effects across the genome of the different breeds was considered. The slopes of regression for PGM on adjusted phenotypes for crossbreds showed overdispersion of the genetic merits for all methods but this bias tended to be reduced by the use of the BOA method and by increasing the number of crossbred animals.ConclusionsFor the estimation of the genetic merit of crossbred animals, the results from this study suggest that the BOA method that accommodates crossbred data can yield more accurate predictions than the methods that use SNP effects from separate within-breed evaluations.

Project description:BackgroundPig and poultry breeding programs aim at improving crossbred (CB) performance. Selection response may be suboptimal if only purebred (PB) performance is used to compute genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) because the genetic correlation between PB and CB performance ([Formula: see text]) is often lower than 1. Thus, it may be beneficial to use information on both PB and CB performance. In addition, the accuracy of GEBV of PB animals for CB performance may improve when the breed-of-origin of alleles (BOA) is considered in the genomic relationship matrix (GRM). Thus, our aim was to compare scenarios where GEBV are computed and validated by using (1) either CB offspring averages or individual CB records for validation, (2) either a PB or CB reference population, and (3) a GRM that either accounts for or ignores BOA in the CB individuals. For this purpose, we used data on body weight measured at around 7 (BW7) or 35 (BW35) days in PB and CB broiler chickens and evaluated the accuracy of GEBV based on the correlation GEBV with phenotypes in the validation population (validation correlation).ResultsWith validation on CB offspring averages, the validation correlation of GEBV of PB animals for CB performance was lower with a CB reference population than with a PB reference population for BW35 ([Formula: see text]?=?0.96), and about equal for BW7 ([Formula: see text]?=?0.80) when BOA was ignored. However, with validation on individual CB records, the validation correlation was higher with a CB reference population for both traits. The use of a GRM that took BOA into account increased the validation correlation for BW7 but reduced it for BW35.ConclusionsWe argue that the benefit of using a CB reference population for genomic prediction of PB animals for CB performance should be assessed either by validation on CB offspring averages, or by validation on individual CB records while using a GRM that accounts for BOA in the CB individuals. With this recommendation in mind, our results show that the accuracy of GEBV of PB animals for CB performance was equal to or higher with a CB reference population than with a PB reference population for a trait with an [Formula: see text] of 0.8, but lower for a trait with an [Formula: see text] of 0.96. In addition, taking BOA into account was beneficial for a trait with an [Formula: see text] of 0.8 but not for a trait with an [Formula: see text] of 0.96.

Project description:Broiler breeding programs rely on crossbreeding. With genomic selection, widespread use of crossbred performance in breeding programs comes within reach. Commercial crossbreds, however, may have unknown pedigrees and their genomes may include DNA from 2 to 4 different breeds. Our aim was, for a broiler dataset with a limited number of sires having both purebred and crossbred offspring generated using natural mating, to rapidly derive parentage, assess the distribution of the sire contribution to the offspring generation, and to assess breed-of-origin of alleles in crossbreds. The dataset contained genotypes for 56,075 SNPs for 5,882 purebred and 10,943 3-way crossbred offspring generated by natural mating of 164 purebred sires to 1,016 purebred and 1,386 F1 crossbred hens. Using our algorithm FindParents, joint parentage derivation for the offspring and parent generations required only 1 m 29 s to retrieve parentage for 20,253 animals considering 4,504 possible parents. FindParents was similarly accurate as a maximum likelihood based method, apart from situations where settings of FindParents did not match the genotyping error rate in the data. Numbers of offspring per sire had a very skewed distribution, ranging from 1 to 270 crossbreds and 1 to 154 purebreds. Derivation of breed-of-origin of alleles relied on phasing all genotypes, including 8,205, 372, and 720 animals from the 3 pure lines involved, and allocating haplotypes in the crossbreds to purebred lines based on observed frequencies in the purebred lines. Breed-of-origin could be derived for 96.94% of the alleles of the 1,386 F1 crossbred hens and for 91.88% of the alleles of the 10,943 3-way crossbred offspring, of which 49.49% to the sire line. The achieved percentage of assignment to the sire line was sufficient to proceed with subsequent analyses requiring only the breed-of-origin of the paternal alleles to be known. Although required number of animals may be population dependent, to increase the total percentage of assigned alleles, it seems advisable to use at least approx. 1,000 genotyped purebred animals for each of the lines involved.

Project description:Crossbreeding is a common strategy used in tropical and subtropical regions to enhance beef production, and having accurate knowledge of breed composition is essential for the success of a crossbreeding program. Although pedigree records have been traditionally used to obtain the breed composition of crossbred cattle, the accuracy of pedigree-based breed composition can be reduced by inaccurate and/or incomplete records and Mendelian sampling. Breed composition estimation from genomic data has multiple advantages including higher accuracy without being affected by missing, incomplete, or inaccurate records and the ability to be used as independent authentication of breed in breed-labeled beef products. The present study was conducted with 676 Angus-Brahman crossbred cattle with genotype and pedigree information to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of using genomic data to determine breed composition. We used genomic data in parametric and non-parametric methods to detect population structure due to differences in breed composition while accounting for the confounding effect of close familial relationships. By applying principal component analysis (PCA) and the maximum likelihood method of ADMIXTURE to genomic data, it was possible to successfully characterize population structure resulting from heterogeneous breed ancestry, while accounting for close familial relationships. PCA results offered additional insight into the different hierarchies of genetic variation structuring. The first principal component was strongly correlated with Angus-Brahman proportions, and the second represented variation within animals that have a relatively more extended Brangus lineage-indicating the presence of a distinct pattern of genetic variation in these cattle. Although there was strong agreement between breed proportions estimated from pedigree and genetic information, there were significant discrepancies between these two methods for certain animals. This was most likely due to inaccuracies in the pedigree-based estimation of breed composition, which supported the case for using genomic information to complement and/or replace pedigree information when estimating breed composition. Comparison with a supervised analysis where purebreds are used as the training set suggest that accurate predictions can be achieved even in the absence of purebred population information.

Project description: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.

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: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

Effects of alleles in crossbred pigs estimated for genomic prediction depend on their breed-of-origin.

Background

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Effects of alleles in crossbred pigs estimated for genomic prediction depend on their breed-of-origin.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets