Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effect of genotyping strategies on the sustained benefit of single-step genomic BLUP over multiple generations.
Sánchez-Mayor, Milagros; Riggio, Valentina; Navarro, Pau; Gutiérrez-Gil, Beatriz; Haley, Chris S; De la Fuente, Luis Fernando; Arranz, Juan-José; Pong-Wong, Ricardo.
Afiliação
  • Sánchez-Mayor M; Dpto. Producción Animal, Universidad de León, 24071, León, Spain.
  • Riggio V; The Roslin Institute and R(D)SVS, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Edinburgh, EH25 9RG, UK.
  • Navarro P; Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health (CTLGH), Roslin Institute, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Edinburgh, EH25 9RG, UK.
  • Gutiérrez-Gil B; MRC Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK.
  • Haley CS; Dpto. Producción Animal, Universidad de León, 24071, León, Spain.
  • De la Fuente LF; The Roslin Institute and R(D)SVS, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Edinburgh, EH25 9RG, UK.
  • Arranz JJ; MRC Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Crewe Road, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK.
  • Pong-Wong R; Dpto. Producción Animal, Universidad de León, 24071, León, Spain.
Genet Sel Evol ; 54(1): 23, 2022 Mar 18.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35303797
BACKGROUND: Single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) allows the inclusion of information from genotyped and ungenotyped individuals in a single analysis. This avoids the need to genotype all candidates with the potential benefit of reducing overall costs. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of genotyping strategies, the proportion of genotyped candidates and the genotyping criterion to rank candidates to be genotyped, when using ssGBLUP evaluation. A simulation study was carried out assuming selection over several discrete generations where a proportion of the candidates were genotyped and evaluation was done using ssGBLUP. The scenarios compared were: (i) three genotyping strategies defined by their protocol for choosing candidates to be genotyped (RANDOM: candidates were chosen at random; TOP: candidates with the best genotyping criterion were genotyped; and EXTREME: candidates with the best and worse criterion were genotyped); (ii) eight proportions of genotyped candidates (p); and (iii) two genotyping criteria to rank candidates to be genotyped (candidates' own phenotype or estimated breeding values). The criteria of the comparison were the cumulated gain and reliability of the genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV). RESULTS: The genotyping strategy with the greatest cumulated gain was TOP followed by RANDOM, with EXTREME behaving as RANDOM at low p and as TOP with high p. However, the reliability of GEBV was higher with RANDOM than with TOP. This disparity between the trend of the gain and the reliability is due to the TOP scheme genotyping the candidates with the greater chances of being selected. The extra gain obtained with TOP increases when the accuracy of the selection criterion to rank candidates to be genotyped increases. CONCLUSIONS: The best strategy to maximise genetic gain when only a proportion of the candidates are to be genotyped is TOP, since it prioritises the genotyping of candidates which are more likely to be selected. However, the strategy with the greatest GEBV reliability does not achieve the largest gain, thus reliability cannot be considered as an absolute and sufficient criterion for determining the scheme which maximises genetic gain.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article