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
. 2017 Mar 10;49(1):34.
doi: 10.1186/s12711-017-0309-2.

Metafounders are related to F st fixation indices and reduce bias in single-step genomic evaluations

Affiliations

Metafounders are related to F st fixation indices and reduce bias in single-step genomic evaluations

Carolina A Garcia-Baccino et al. Genet Sel Evol. .

Abstract

Background: Metafounders are pseudo-individuals that encapsulate genetic heterozygosity and relationships within and across base pedigree populations, i.e. ancestral populations. This work addresses the estimation and usefulness of metafounder relationships in single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP).

Results: We show that ancestral relationship parameters are proportional to standardized covariances of base allelic frequencies across populations, such as [Formula: see text] fixation indexes. These covariances of base allelic frequencies can be estimated from marker genotypes of related recent individuals and pedigree. Simple methods for their estimation include naïve computation of allele frequencies from marker genotypes or a method of moments that equates average pedigree-based and marker-based relationships. Complex methods include generalized least squares (best linear unbiased estimator (BLUE)) or maximum likelihood based on pedigree relationships. To our knowledge, methods to infer [Formula: see text] coefficients from marker data have not been developed for related individuals. We derived a genomic relationship matrix, compatible with pedigree relationships, that is constructed as a cross-product of {-1,0,1} codes and that is equivalent (apart from scale factors) to an identity-by-state relationship matrix at genome-wide markers. Using a simulation with a single population under selection in which only males and youngest animals are genotyped, we observed that generalized least squares or maximum likelihood gave accurate and unbiased estimates of the ancestral relationship parameter (true value: 0.40) whereas the naïve method and the method of moments were biased (average estimates of 0.43 and 0.35). We also observed that genomic evaluation by ssGBLUP using metafounders was less biased in terms of estimates of genetic trend (bias of 0.01 instead of 0.12), resulted in less overdispersed (0.94 instead of 0.99) and as accurate (0.74) estimates of breeding values than ssGBLUP without metafounders and provided consistent estimates of heritability.

Conclusions: Estimation of metafounder relationships can be achieved using BLUP-like methods with pedigree and markers. Inclusion of metafounder relationships reduces bias of genomic predictions with no loss in accuracy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Differences between estimated and true Gamma, across 20 simulation replicates. Gamma was estimated by generalized least squares (GLS), maximum likelihood (ML), method of moments (MM) and the Naive method
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
a Correlation of TBV with EVB for each prediction method (accuracy). b Regression slope of TBV on EBV (overdispersion). c Bias [average (EBV–TBV)]
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Estimated heritability for PBLUP, SSGBLUP_F and SSGBLUP_M considering the 20 replicates. The dotted line shows the simulated heritability of 0.30

References

    1. Legarra A, Christensen OF, Vitezica ZG, Aguilar I, Misztal I. Ancestral relationships using metafounders: finite ancestral populations and across population relationships. Genetics. 2015;200:455–468. doi: 10.1534/genetics.115.177014. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Legarra A, Aguilar I, Misztal I. A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. J Dairy Sci. 2009;92:4656–4663. doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2061. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Christensen OF, Lund MS. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genet Sel Evol. 2010;42:2. doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-42-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fernando RL, Dekkers JC, Garrick DJ. A class of Bayesian methods to combine large numbers of genotyped and non-genotyped animals for whole-genome analyses. Genet Sel Evol. 2014;46:50. doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-46-50. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vitezica Z, Aguilar I, Misztal I, Legarra A. Bias in genomic predictions for populations under selection. Genet Res (Camb). 2011;93:357–366. doi: 10.1017/S001667231100022X. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources