0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Genomic predictions for fillet yield and firmness in rainbow trout using reduced-density SNP panels

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          One of the most important goals for the rainbow trout aquaculture industry is to improve fillet yield and fillet quality. Previously, we showed that a 50 K transcribed-SNP chip can be used to detect quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with fillet yield and fillet firmness. In this study, data from 1568 fish genotyped for the 50 K transcribed-SNP chip and ~ 774 fish phenotyped for fillet yield and fillet firmness were used in a single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) model to compute the genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV). In addition, pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP) was used to calculate traditional, family-based estimated breeding values (EBV).

          Results

          The genomic predictions outperformed the traditional EBV by 35% for fillet yield and 42% for fillet firmness. The predictive ability for fillet yield and fillet firmness was 0.19–0.20 with PBLUP, and 0.27 with ssGBLUP. Additionally, reducing SNP panel densities indicated that using 500–800 SNPs in genomic predictions still provides predictive abilities higher than PBLUP.

          Conclusion

          These results suggest that genomic evaluation is a feasible strategy to identify and select fish with superior genetic merit within rainbow trout families, even with low-density SNP panels.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12864-021-07404-9.

          Related collections

          Most cited references66

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses.

          Whole-genome association studies (WGAS) bring new computational, as well as analytic, challenges to researchers. Many existing genetic-analysis tools are not designed to handle such large data sets in a convenient manner and do not necessarily exploit the new opportunities that whole-genome data bring. To address these issues, we developed PLINK, an open-source C/C++ WGAS tool set. With PLINK, large data sets comprising hundreds of thousands of markers genotyped for thousands of individuals can be rapidly manipulated and analyzed in their entirety. As well as providing tools to make the basic analytic steps computationally efficient, PLINK also supports some novel approaches to whole-genome data that take advantage of whole-genome coverage. We introduce PLINK and describe the five main domains of function: data management, summary statistics, population stratification, association analysis, and identity-by-descent estimation. In particular, we focus on the estimation and use of identity-by-state and identity-by-descent information in the context of population-based whole-genome studies. This information can be used to detect and correct for population stratification and to identify extended chromosomal segments that are shared identical by descent between very distantly related individuals. Analysis of the patterns of segmental sharing has the potential to map disease loci that contain multiple rare variants in a population-based linkage analysis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Hot topic: a unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score.

            The first national single-step, full-information (phenotype, pedigree, and marker genotype) genetic evaluation was developed for final score of US Holsteins. Data included final scores recorded from 1955 to 2009 for 6,232,548 Holsteins cows. BovineSNP50 (Illumina, San Diego, CA) genotypes from the Cooperative Dairy DNA Repository (Beltsville, MD) were available for 6,508 bulls. Three analyses used a repeatability animal model as currently used for the national US evaluation. The first 2 analyses used final scores recorded up to 2004. The first analysis used only a pedigree-based relationship matrix. The second analysis used a relationship matrix based on both pedigree and genomic information (single-step approach). The third analysis used the complete data set and only the pedigree-based relationship matrix. The fourth analysis used predictions from the first analysis (final scores up to 2004 and only a pedigree-based relationship matrix) and prediction using a genomic based matrix to obtain genetic evaluation (multiple-step approach). Different allele frequencies were tested in construction of the genomic relationship matrix. Coefficients of determination between predictions of young bulls from parent average, single-step, and multiple-step approaches and their 2009 daughter deviations were 0.24, 0.37 to 0.41, and 0.40, respectively. The highest coefficient of determination for a single-step approach was observed when using a genomic relationship matrix with assumed allele frequencies of 0.5. Coefficients for regression of 2009 daughter deviations on parent-average, single-step, and multiple-step predictions were 0.76, 0.68 to 0.79, and 0.86, respectively, which indicated some inflation of predictions. The single-step regression coefficient could be increased up to 0.92 by scaling differences between the genomic and pedigree-based relationship matrices with little loss in accuracy of prediction. One complete evaluation took about 2h of computing time and 2.7 gigabytes of memory. Computing times for single-step analyses were slightly longer (2%) than for pedigree-based analysis. A national single-step genetic evaluation with the pedigree relationship matrix augmented with genomic information provided genomic predictions with accuracy and bias comparable to multiple-step procedures and could account for any population or data structure. Advantages of single-step evaluations should increase in the future when animals are pre-selected on genotypes. Copyright 2010 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps.

              Recent advances in molecular genetic techniques will make dense marker maps available and genotyping many individuals for these markers feasible. Here we attempted to estimate the effects of approximately 50,000 marker haplotypes simultaneously from a limited number of phenotypic records. A genome of 1000 cM was simulated with a marker spacing of 1 cM. The markers surrounding every 1-cM region were combined into marker haplotypes. Due to finite population size N(e) = 100, the marker haplotypes were in linkage disequilibrium with the QTL located between the markers. Using least squares, all haplotype effects could not be estimated simultaneously. When only the biggest effects were included, they were overestimated and the accuracy of predicting genetic values of the offspring of the recorded animals was only 0.32. Best linear unbiased prediction of haplotype effects assumed equal variances associated to each 1-cM chromosomal segment, which yielded an accuracy of 0.73, although this assumption was far from true. Bayesian methods that assumed a prior distribution of the variance associated with each chromosome segment increased this accuracy to 0.85, even when the prior was not correct. It was concluded that selection on genetic values predicted from markers could substantially increase the rate of genetic gain in animals and plants, especially if combined with reproductive techniques to shorten the generation interval.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                mosalem@umd.edu
                Journal
                BMC Genomics
                BMC Genomics
                BMC Genomics
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2164
                30 January 2021
                30 January 2021
                2021
                : 22
                : 92
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.260001.5, ISNI 0000 0001 2111 6385, Computational Science Program, , Middle Tennessee State University, ; Murfreesboro, TN 37132 USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.164295.d, ISNI 0000 0001 0941 7177, Department of Animal and Avian Sciences, , University of Maryland, ; College Park, MD 20742 USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.213876.9, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 738X, Department of Animal and Dairy Science, , University of Georgia, ; Athens, GA 30602 USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.463419.d, ISNI 0000 0001 0946 3608, National Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, ; Kearneysville, WV USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2142-6716
                Article
                7404
                10.1186/s12864-021-07404-9
                7847601
                33516179
                4df7ea47-fd6b-40f7-8165-08f3d1a91e5a
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 18 June 2020
                : 22 January 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100005825, National Institute of Food and Agriculture;
                Award ID: No. 2014–67015-21602
                Award ID: 2021-67015-33388
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007917, Agricultural Research Service;
                Award ID: 1930–31000-010
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Genetics
                genomic selection,gebv,ebv,ld pruning,predictive ability
                Genetics
                genomic selection, gebv, ebv, ld pruning, predictive ability

                Comments

                Comment on this article