Dataset Information

Impact of genomic preselection on subsequent genetic evaluations with ssGBLUP using real data from pigs.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Empirically assessing the impact of preselection on genetic evaluation of preselected animals requires comparing scenarios that take different approaches into account, including scenarios without preselection. However, preselection is almost always performed in animal breeding programs, so it is difficult to have a dataset without preselection. Hence, most studies on preselection have used simulated datasets, and have concluded that genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) from subsequent single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) evaluations are unbiased. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of genomic preselection (GPS) on accuracy and bias in subsequent ssGBLUP evaluations, using data from a commercial pig breeding program.

Methods

We used data on average daily gain during performance testing, average daily gain throughout life, backfat thickness, and loin depth from one sire line and one dam line of pigs. As these traits have different weights in the breeding goals of the two lines, we analyzed the lines separately. For each line, we implemented a reference GPS scenario that kept all available data, against which the next two scenarios were compared. We then implemented two other scenarios with additional layers of GPS by removing all animals without progeny either (i) only in the validation generation, or (ii) in all generations. We conducted subsequent ssGBLUP evaluations for each GPS scenario, using all the data remaining after implementing the GPS scenario. Accuracy and bias were computed by comparing GEBV against progeny yield deviations of validation animals.

Results

Results for all traits and in both lines showed a marginal loss in accuracy due to the additional layers of GPS. Average accuracies across all GPS scenarios in the two lines were 0.39, 0.47, 0.56, and 0.60, for average daily gain during performance testing and throughout life, backfat thickness, and loin depth, respectively. Biases were largely absent, and when present, did not differ greatly between the GPS scenarios.

Conclusions

We conclude that the impact of preselection on accuracy and bias in subsequent ssGBLUP evaluations of selection candidates in pigs is generally minimal. We expect this conclusion to apply for other animal breeding programs as well, since preselection of any type or intensity generally has the same effect in animal breeding programs.

SUBMITTER: Jibrila I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9238012 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPreselection of candidates, hereafter referred to as preselection, is a common practice in breeding programs. Preselection can cause bias and accuracy loss in subsequent pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP). However, the impact of preselection on subsequent single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) is not completely clear yet. Therefore, in this study, we investigated, across different heritabilities, the impact of intensity and type of preselection on subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation of preselected animals.MethodsWe simulated a nucleus of a breeding programme, in which a recent population of 15 generations was produced with PBLUP-based selection. In generation 15 of this recent population, the parents of the next generation were preselected using several preselection scenarios. These scenarios were combinations of three intensities of preselection (no, high or very high preselection) and three types of preselection (genomic, parental average or random), across three heritabilities (0.5, 0.3 or 0.1). Following each preselection scenario, a subsequent evaluation was performed using ssGBLUP by excluding all the information from the preculled animals, and these genetic evaluations were compared in terms of accuracy and bias for the preselected animals, and in terms of realized genetic gain.ResultsType of preselection affected selection accuracy at both preselection and subsequent evaluation stages. While preselection accuracy decreased, accuracy in the subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation increased, from genomic to parent average to random preselection scenarios. Bias was always negligible. Genetic gain decreased from genomic to parent average to random preselection scenarios. Genetic gain also decreased with increasing intensity of preselection, but only by a maximum of 0.1 additive genetic standard deviation from no to very high genomic preselection scenarios.ConclusionsUsing ssGBLUP in subsequent evaluations prevents preselection bias, irrespective of intensity and type of preselection, and heritability. With GPS, in addition to reducing the phenotyping effort considerably, the use of ssGBLUP in subsequent evaluations realizes only a slightly lower genetic gain than that realized without preselection. This is especially the case for traits that are expensive to measure (e.g. feed intake of individual broiler chickens), and traits for which phenotypes can only be measured at advanced stages of life (e.g. litter size in pigs).

Project description:BackgroundPresently, multi-omics data (e.g., genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics) are available to improve genomic predictors. Omics data not only offers new data layers for genomic prediction but also provides a bridge between organismal phenotypes and genome variation that cannot be readily captured at the genome sequence level. Therefore, using multi-omics data to select feature markers is a feasible strategy to improve the accuracy of genomic prediction. In this study, simultaneously using whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and gene expression level data, four strategies for single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) preselection were investigated for genomic predictions in the Drosophila Genetic Reference Panel.ResultsUsing genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) with complete WGS data, the prediction accuracies were 0.208 ± 0.020 (0.181 ± 0.022) for the startle response and 0.272 ± 0.017 (0.307 ± 0.015) for starvation resistance in the female (male) lines. Compared with GBLUP using complete WGS data, both GBLUP and the genomic feature BLUP (GFBLUP) did not improve the prediction accuracy using SNPs preselected from complete WGS data based on the results of genome-wide association studies (GWASs) or transcriptome-wide association studies (TWASs). Furthermore, by using SNPs preselected from the WGS data based on the results of the expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) mapping of all genes, only the startle response had greater accuracy than GBLUP with the complete WGS data. The best accuracy values in the female and male lines were 0.243 ± 0.020 and 0.220 ± 0.022, respectively. Importantly, by using SNPs preselected based on the results of the eQTL mapping of significant genes from TWAS, both GBLUP and GFBLUP resulted in great accuracy and small bias of genomic prediction. Compared with the GBLUP using complete WGS data, the best accuracy values represented increases of 60.66% and 39.09% for the starvation resistance and 27.40% and 35.36% for startle response in the female and male lines, respectively.ConclusionsOverall, multi-omics data can assist genomic feature preselection and improve the performance of genomic prediction. The new knowledge gained from this study will enrich the use of multi-omics in genomic prediction.

Project description:BackgroundWhole-genome sequence (WGS) data harbor causative variants that may not be present in standard single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chip data. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of using preselected variants from WGS for single-step genomic predictions in maternal and terminal pig lines with up to 1.8k sequenced and 104k sequence imputed animals per line.MethodsTwo maternal and four terminal lines were investigated for eight and seven traits, respectively. The number of sequenced animals ranged from 1365 to 1491 for the maternal lines and 381 to 1865 for the terminal lines. Imputation to sequence occurred within each line for 66k to 76k animals for the maternal lines and 29k to 104k animals for the terminal lines. Two preselected SNP sets were generated based on a genome-wide association study (GWAS). Top40k included the SNPs with the lowest p-value in each of the 40k genomic windows, and ChipPlusSign included significant variants integrated into the porcine SNP chip used for routine genotyping. We compared the performance of single-step genomic predictions between using preselected SNP sets assuming equal or different variances and the standard porcine SNP chip.ResultsIn the maternal lines, ChipPlusSign and Top40k showed an average increase in accuracy of 0.6 and 4.9%, respectively, compared to the regular porcine SNP chip. The greatest increase was obtained with Top40k, particularly for fertility traits, for which the initial accuracy based on the standard SNP chip was low. However, in the terminal lines, Top40k resulted in an average loss of accuracy of 1%. ChipPlusSign provided a positive, although small, gain in accuracy (0.9%). Assigning different variances for the SNPs slightly improved accuracies when using variances obtained from BayesR. However, increases were inconsistent across the lines and traits.ConclusionsThe benefit of using sequence data depends on the line, the size of the genotyped population, and how the WGS variants are preselected. When WGS data are available on hundreds of thousands of animals, using sequence data presents an advantage but this remains limited in pigs.

Project description:Neighborhood influences in the etiology of schizophrenia have been emphasized in a number of systematic reviews, but causality remains uncertain. To test the social drift hypothesis, we used three complementary genetically informed Swedish cohorts. First, we used nationwide Swedish data on approximately 760 000 full- and half-sibling pairs born between 1951 and 1974 and quantitative genetic models to study genetic and environmental influences on the overlap between schizophrenia in young adulthood and subsequent residence in socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods. Schizophrenia diagnoses were ascertained using the National Patient Registry. Second, we tested the overlap between childhood psychotic experiences and neighborhood deprivation in early adulthood in the longitudinal Twin Study of Child and Adolescent Development (TCHAD; n=2960). Third, we investigated to what extent polygenic risk scores for schizophrenia predicted residence in deprived neighborhoods during late adulthood using the TwinGene sample (n=6796). Sibling data suggested that living in deprived neighborhoods was substantially heritable; 65% (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 60-71%) of the variance was attributed to genetic influences. Although the correlation between schizophrenia and neighborhood deprivation was moderate in magnitude (r=0.22; 95% CI: 0.20-0.24), it was entirely explained by genetic influences. We replicated these findings in the TCHAD sample. Moreover, the association between polygenic risk for schizophrenia and neighborhood deprivation was statistically significant (R(2)=0.15%, P=0.002). Our findings are primarily consistent with a genetic selection interpretation where genetic liability for schizophrenia also predicts subsequent residence in socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods. Previous studies may have overemphasized the relative importance of environmental influences in the social drift of schizophrenia patients. Clinical and policy interventions will therefore benefit from the future identification of potentially causal pathways between different dimensions of cognitive functions and socioeconomic trajectories derived from studies adopting family-based research designs.