Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Genomic selection through single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction improves the accuracy of evaluation in Hanwoo cattle.


ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Genomic selection (GS) is becoming popular in animals' genetic development. We, therefore, investigated the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) as tool for GS, and compared its efficacy with the traditional pedigree BLUP (pedBLUP) method. METHODS:A total of 9,952 males born between 1997 and 2018 under Hanwoo proven-bull selection program was studied. We analyzed body weight at 12 months and carcass weight (kg), backfat thickness, eye muscle area, and marbling score traits. About 7,387 bulls were genotyped using Illumina 50K BeadChip Arrays. Multiple-trait animal model analyses were performed using BLUPF90 software programs. Breeding value accuracy was calculated using two. METHODS:i) Pearson's correlation of genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) with EBV of all animals (rM1) and ii) correlation using inverse of coefficient matrix from the mixed-model equations (rM2). Then, we compared these accuracies by overall population, info-type (PHEN, phenotyped-only; GEN, genotyped-only; and PH+GEN, phenotyped and genotyped), and bull-types (YBULL, young male calves; CBULL, young candidate bulls; and PBULL, proven bulls). RESULTS:The rM1 estimates in the study were between 0.90 and 0.96 among five traits. The rM1 estimates varied slightly by population and info-type, but noticeably by bull-type for traits. Generally average rM2 estimates were much smaller than rM1 (pedBLUP, 0.40 to0.44; ssGBLUP, 0.41 to 0.45) at population level. However, rM2 from both BLUP models varied noticeably across info-types and bull-types. The ssGBLUP estimates of rM2 in PHEN, GEN, and PH+ GEN ranged between 0.51 and 0.63, 0.66 and 0.70, and 0.68 and 0.73, respectively. In YBULL, CBULL, and PBULL, the rM2 estimates ranged between 0.54 and 0.57, 0.55 and 0.62, and 0.70 and 0.74, respectively. The pedBLUP based rM2 estimates were also relatively lower than ssGBLUP estimates. At the population level, we found an increase in accuracy by 2.0% to 4.5% among traits. Traits in PHEN were least influenced by ssGBLUP (0% to 2.0%), whereas the highest positive changes were in GEN (8.1% to 10.7%). PH+GEN also showed 6.5% to 8.5% increase in accuracy by ssGBLUP. However, the highest improvements were found in bull-types (YBULL, 21% to 35.7%; CBULL, 3.3% to 9.3%; PBULL, 2.8% to 6.1%). CONCLUSION:A noticeable improvement by ssGBLUP was observed in this study. Findings of differential responses to ssGBLUP by various bulls could assist in better selection decision making as well. We, therefore, suggest that ssGBLUP could be used for GS in Hanwoo provenbull evaluation program.

SUBMITTER: Park MN 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7463086 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Genomic selection through single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction improves the accuracy of evaluation in Hanwoo cattle.

Park Mi Na MN   Alam Mahboob M   Kim Sidong S   Park Byoungho B   Lee Seung Hwan SH   Lee Sung Soo SS  

Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences 20191112 10


<h4>Objective</h4>Genomic selection (GS) is becoming popular in animals' genetic development. We, therefore, investigated the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) as tool for GS, and compared its efficacy with the traditional pedigree BLUP (pedBLUP) method.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 9,952 males born between 1997 and 2018 under Hanwoo proven-bull selection program was studied. We analyzed body weight at 12 months and carcass weight (kg), backfat thickness, eye muscle area  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC7709290 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6947347 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8701981 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6247857 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4151732 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9264777 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7429790 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8827023 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3708840 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8363309 | biostudies-literature