Performance of genomic selection in mice
- PMID: 18757934
- PMCID: PMC2535710
- DOI: 10.1534/genetics.108.088575
Performance of genomic selection in mice
Abstract
Selection plans in plant and animal breeding are driven by genetic evaluation. Recent developments suggest using massive genetic marker information, known as "genomic selection." There is little evidence of its performance, though. We empirically compared three strategies for selection: (1) use of pedigree and phenotypic information, (2) use of genomewide markers and phenotypic information, and (3) the combination of both. We analyzed four traits from a heterogeneous mouse population (http://gscan.well.ox.ac.uk/), including 1884 individuals and 10,946 SNP markers. We used linear mixed models, using extensions of association analysis. Cross-validation techniques were used, providing assumption-free estimates of predictive ability. Sampling of validation and training data sets was carried out across and within families, which allows comparing across- and within-family information. Use of genomewide genetic markers increased predictive ability up to 0.22 across families and up to 0.03 within families. The latter is not statistically significant. These values are roughly comparable to increases of up to 0.57 (across family) and 0.14 (within family) in accuracy of prediction of genetic value. In this data set, within-family information was more accurate than across-family information, and populational linkage disequilibrium was not a completely accurate source of information for genetic evaluation. This fact questions some applications of genomic selection.
Similar articles
-
Accuracy of genomic selection for a sib-evaluated trait using identity-by-state and identity-by-descent relationships.Genet Sel Evol. 2015 Feb 25;47(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s12711-014-0084-2. Genet Sel Evol. 2015. PMID: 25888184 Free PMC article.
-
Genomic prediction in family bulks using different traits and cross-validations in pine.G3 (Bethesda). 2021 Sep 6;11(9):jkab249. doi: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab249. G3 (Bethesda). 2021. PMID: 34544139 Free PMC article.
-
Genome-Enabled Estimates of Additive and Nonadditive Genetic Variances and Prediction of Apple Phenotypes Across Environments.G3 (Bethesda). 2015 Oct 23;5(12):2711-8. doi: 10.1534/g3.115.021105. G3 (Bethesda). 2015. PMID: 26497141 Free PMC article.
-
Accounting for trait architecture in genomic predictions of US Holstein cattle using a weighted realized relationship matrix.Genet Sel Evol. 2015 Apr 2;47(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s12711-015-0100-1. Genet Sel Evol. 2015. PMID: 25886167 Free PMC article.
-
Genomic selection models double the accuracy of predicted breeding values for bacterial cold water disease resistance compared to a traditional pedigree-based model in rainbow trout aquaculture.Genet Sel Evol. 2017 Feb 1;49(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s12711-017-0293-6. Genet Sel Evol. 2017. PMID: 28148220 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
An Upper Bound for Accuracy of Prediction Using GBLUP.PLoS One. 2016 Aug 16;11(8):e0161054. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161054. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27529480 Free PMC article.
-
Validation of single-step GBLUP genomic predictions from threshold models using the linear regression method: An application in chicken mortality.J Anim Breed Genet. 2021 Jan;138(1):4-13. doi: 10.1111/jbg.12507. Epub 2020 Sep 28. J Anim Breed Genet. 2021. PMID: 32985749 Free PMC article.
-
Tin oxide nanowires suppress herpes simplex virus-1 entry and cell-to-cell membrane fusion.PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e48147. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048147. Epub 2012 Oct 24. PLoS One. 2012. PMID: 23110193 Free PMC article.
-
Effectiveness of genomic prediction of maize hybrid performance in different breeding populations and environments.G3 (Bethesda). 2012 Nov;2(11):1427-36. doi: 10.1534/g3.112.003699. Epub 2012 Nov 1. G3 (Bethesda). 2012. PMID: 23173094 Free PMC article.
-
Accuracy of across-environment genome-wide prediction in maize nested association mapping populations.G3 (Bethesda). 2013 Feb;3(2):263-72. doi: 10.1534/g3.112.005066. Epub 2013 Feb 1. G3 (Bethesda). 2013. PMID: 23390602 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Bauer, A. M., T. C. Reetz and J. Léon, 2006. Estimation of breeding values of inbred lines using best linear unbiased prediction (blup) and genetic similarities. Crop Sci. 46 2685–2691.
-
- Boichard, D., S. Fritz, M. Rossignol, F. Guillaume, J. J. Colleau et al., 2006. Implementation of marker assisted selection: practical lessons from dairy cattle. Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, CD-ROM communication 22–11.
-
- Caballero, A., and M. A. Toro, 2002. Analysis of genetic diversity for the management of conserved subdivided populations. Conserv. Genet. 3 289–299.
-
- Chamberlain, A. J., and M. E. Goddard, 2006. Testing marker assisted selection in a real breeding program. Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, CD-ROM communication 22–12.
-
- Dekkers, J. C. M., 2007. Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance. J. Anim. Sci. 85 2104–2114. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources