Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Current status of genomic evaluation

      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

          Early application of genomic selection relied on SNP estimation with phenotypes or de-regressed proofs ( DRP). Chips of 50k SNP seemed sufficient for an accurate estimation of SNP effects. Genomic estimated breeding values ( GEBV) were composed of an index with parent average, direct genomic value, and deduction of a parental index to eliminate double counting. Use of SNP selection or weighting increased accuracy with small data sets but had minimal to no impact with large data sets. Efforts to include potentially causative SNP derived from sequence data or high-density chips showed limited or no gain in accuracy. After the implementation of genomic selection, EBV by BLUP became biased because of genomic preselection and DRP computed based on EBV required adjustments, and the creation of DRP for females is hard and subject to double counting. Genomic selection was greatly simplified by single-step genomic BLUP ( ssGBLUP). This method based on combining genomic and pedigree relationships automatically creates an index with all sources of information, can use any combination of male and female genotypes, and accounts for preselection. To avoid biases, especially under strong selection, ssGBLUP requires that pedigree and genomic relationships are compatible. Because the inversion of the genomic relationship matrix ( G) becomes costly with more than 100k genotyped animals, large data computations in ssGBLUP were solved by exploiting limited dimensionality of genomic data due to limited effective population size. With such dimensionality ranging from 4k in chickens to about 15k in cattle, the inverse of G can be created directly (e.g., by the algorithm for proven and young) at a linear cost. Due to its simplicity and accuracy, ssGBLUP is routinely used for genomic selection by the major chicken, pig, and beef industries. Single step can be used to derive SNP effects for indirect prediction and for genome-wide association studies, including computations of the P-values. Alternative single-step formulations exist that use SNP effects for genotyped or for all animals. Although genomics is the new standard in breeding and genetics, there are still some problems that need to be solved. This involves new validation procedures that are unaffected by selection, parameter estimation that accounts for all the genomic data used in selection, and strategies to address reduction in genetic variances after genomic selection was implemented.

          Related collections

          Most cited references120

          • 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

            Development and Characterization of a High Density SNP Genotyping Assay for Cattle

            The success of genome-wide association (GWA) studies for the detection of sequence variation affecting complex traits in human has spurred interest in the use of large-scale high-density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping for the identification of quantitative trait loci (QTL) and for marker-assisted selection in model and agricultural species. A cost-effective and efficient approach for the development of a custom genotyping assay interrogating 54,001 SNP loci to support GWA applications in cattle is described. A novel algorithm for achieving a compressed inter-marker interval distribution proved remarkably successful, with median interval of 37 kb and maximum predicted gap of <350 kb. The assay was tested on a panel of 576 animals from 21 cattle breeds and six outgroup species and revealed that from 39,765 to 46,492 SNP are polymorphic within individual breeds (average minor allele frequency (MAF) ranging from 0.24 to 0.27). The assay also identified 79 putative copy number variants in cattle. Utility for GWA was demonstrated by localizing known variation for coat color and the presence/absence of horns to their correct genomic locations. The combination of SNP selection and the novel spacing algorithm allows an efficient approach for the development of high-density genotyping platforms in species having full or even moderate quality draft sequence. Aspects of the approach can be exploited in species which lack an available genome sequence. The BovineSNP50 assay described here is commercially available from Illumina and provides a robust platform for mapping disease genes and QTL in cattle.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Improving accuracy of genomic predictions within and between dairy cattle breeds with imputed high-density single nucleotide polymorphism panels.

              Achieving accurate genomic estimated breeding values for dairy cattle requires a very large reference population of genotyped and phenotyped individuals. Assembling such reference populations has been achieved for breeds such as Holstein, but is challenging for breeds with fewer individuals. An alternative is to use a multi-breed reference population, such that smaller breeds gain some advantage in accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) from information from larger breeds. However, this requires that marker-quantitative trait loci associations persist across breeds. Here, we assessed the gain in accuracy of GEBV in Jersey cattle as a result of using a combined Holstein and Jersey reference population, with either 39,745 or 624,213 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers. The surrogate used for accuracy was the correlation of GEBV with daughter trait deviations in a validation population. Two methods were used to predict breeding values, either a genomic BLUP (GBLUP_mod), or a new method, BayesR, which used a mixture of normal distributions as the prior for SNP effects, including one distribution that set SNP effects to zero. The GBLUP_mod method scaled both the genomic relationship matrix and the additive relationship matrix to a base at the time the breeds diverged, and regressed the genomic relationship matrix to account for sampling errors in estimating relationship coefficients due to a finite number of markers, before combining the 2 matrices. Although these modifications did result in less biased breeding values for Jerseys compared with an unmodified genomic relationship matrix, BayesR gave the highest accuracies of GEBV for the 3 traits investigated (milk yield, fat yield, and protein yield), with an average increase in accuracy compared with GBLUP_mod across the 3 traits of 0.05 for both Jerseys and Holsteins. The advantage was limited for either Jerseys or Holsteins in using 624,213 SNP rather than 39,745 SNP (0.01 for Holsteins and 0.03 for Jerseys, averaged across traits). Even this limited and nonsignificant advantage was only observed when BayesR was used. An alternative panel, which extracted the SNP in the transcribed part of the bovine genome from the 624,213 SNP panel (to give 58,532 SNP), performed better, with an increase in accuracy of 0.03 for Jerseys across traits. This panel captures much of the increased genomic content of the 624,213 SNP panel, with the advantage of a greatly reduced number of SNP effects to estimate. Taken together, using this panel, a combined breed reference and using BayesR rather than GBLUP_mod increased the accuracy of GEBV in Jerseys from 0.43 to 0.52, averaged across the 3 traits. Copyright © 2012 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Anim Sci
                J. Anim. Sci
                jansci
                Journal of Animal Science
                Oxford University Press (US )
                0021-8812
                1525-3163
                April 2020
                08 April 2020
                08 April 2020
                : 98
                : 4
                : skaa101
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia , Athens, GA
                [2 ] Department of Animal Genetics, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique , Castanet-Tolosan, France
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: ignacy@ 123456uga.edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0382-1897
                Article
                skaa101
                10.1093/jas/skaa101
                7183352
                32267923
                50c9d1ef-f0d4-4593-ad7e-c824385391d6
                © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 29 January 2020
                : 07 April 2020
                : 25 April 2020
                Page count
                Pages: 14
                Funding
                Funded by: American Angus Association;
                Funded by: Cobb-Vantress;
                Funded by: Genus PIC;
                Funded by: Holstein Association USA, DOI 10.13039/100013834;
                Funded by: Smithfield Premium Genetics;
                Funded by: Zoetis, DOI 10.13039/100012895;
                Funded by: U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture;
                Funded by: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative competitive;
                Award ID: 2015-67015-22936
                Categories
                Board Invited Review
                AcademicSubjects/SCI00960

                genomic evaluation,genomic selection,large data,single-step gblup

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content16

                Cited by51

                Most referenced authors903