Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Feb 23;3 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S10.
doi: 10.1186/1753-6561-3-s1-s10.

Estimating genomic breeding values from the QTL-MAS Workshop Data using a single SNP and haplotype/IBD approach

Affiliations

Estimating genomic breeding values from the QTL-MAS Workshop Data using a single SNP and haplotype/IBD approach

Mario P L Calus et al. BMC Proc. .

Abstract

Genomic breeding values were estimated using a Gibbs sampler that avoided the use of the Metropolis-Hastings step as implemented in the BayesB model of Meuwissen et al., Genetics 2001, 157:1819-1829.Two models that estimated genomic estimated breeding values (EBVs) were applied: one used constructed haplotypes (based on alleles of 20 markers) and IBD matrices, another used single SNP regression. Both models were applied with or without polygenic effect. A fifth model included only polygenic effects and no genomic information.The models needed to estimate 366,959 effects for the haplotype/IBD approach, but only 11,850 effects for the single SNP approach. The four genomic models identified 11 to 14 regions that had a posterior QTL probability >0.1. Accuracies of genomic selection breeding values for animals in generations 4-6 ranged from 0.84 to 0.87 (haplotype/IBD vs. SNP).It can be concluded that including a polygenic effect in the genomic model had no effect on the accuracy of the total EBVs or prediction of the QTL positions. The SNP model yielded slightly higher accuracies for the total EBVs, while both models were able to detect nearly all QTL that explained at least 0.5% of the total phenotypic variance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Posterior QTL probabilities along the genome, estimated using HAP_POL, HAP_NOPOL, SNP_POL, and SNP_NOPOL, and the position of QTL that explained > 0.5% van de phenotypic variance.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Meuwissen THE, Goddard ME. Mapping multiple QTL using linkage disequilibrium and linkage analysis information and multitrait data. Genetics Selection Evolution. 2004;363:261–279. doi: 10.1051/gse:2004001. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. George EI, McCulloch RE. Variable selection via gibbs sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1993;88:881–889. doi: 10.2307/2290777. - DOI
    1. Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics. 2001;157:1819–1829. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Meuwissen THE, Goddard ME. Prediction of identity by descent probabilities from marker-haplotypes. Genet Sel Evol. 2001;336:605–634. doi: 10.1051/gse:2001134. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fernando RL, Grossman M. Marker assisted selection using best linear unbiased prediction. Genet Sel Evol. 1989;214:467–477. doi: 10.1051/gse:19890407. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources