Accuracy of genomic prediction using different models and response variables in the Nordic Red cattle population

Breeding animals can be accurately evaluated using appropriate genomic prediction models, based on marker data and phenotype information. In this study, direct genomic values (DGV) were estimated for 16 traits of Nordic Total Merit (NTM) Index in Nordic Red cattle population using three models and two different response variables. The three models were as follows: a linear mixed model (GBLUP), a Bayesian variable selection model similar to BayesA (BayesA*) and a Bayesian least absolute shrinkage and selection operator model (Bayesian Lasso). The response variables were deregressed proofs (DRP) and conventional estimated breeding values (EBV). The reliability of genomic predictions was measured on bulls in the validation data set as the squared correlation between DGV and DRP divided by the reliability of DRP. Using DRP as response variable, the reliabilities of DGV among the 16 traits ranged from 0.151 to 0.569 (average 0.317) for GBLUP, from 0.152 to 0.576 (average 0.318) for BayesA* and from 0.150 to 0.570 (average 0.320) for Bayesian Lasso. Using EBV as response variable, the reliabilities ranged from 0.159 to 0.580 (average 0.322) for GBLUP, from 0.157 to 0.578 (average 0.319) for BayesA* and from 0.159 to 0.582 (average 0.325) for Bayesian Lasso. In summary, Bayesian Lasso performed slightly better than the other two models, and EBV performed slightly better than DRP as response variable, with regard to prediction reliability of DGV. However, these differences were not statistically significant. Moreover, using EBV as response variable would result in problems with the scale of the resulting DGV and potential problem due to double counting.     

Comparing deregression methods for genomic prediction of test‐day traits in dairy cattle

We aimed to investigate the performance of three deregression methods (VanRaden, VR; Wiggans, WG; and Garrick, GR) of cows’ and bulls’ breeding values to be used as pseudophenotypes in the genomic evaluation of test‐day dairy production traits. Three scenarios were considered within each deregression method: (i) including only animals with reliability of estimated breeding value (REL_EBV ) higher than the average of parent reliability (REL_PA ) in the training and validation populations; (ii) including only animals with REL_EBV higher than 0.50 in the training and REL_EBV higher than REL_PA in the validation population; and (iii) including only animals with REL_EBV higher than 0.50 in both training and validation populations. Individual random regression coefficients of lactation curves were predicted using the genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), considering either unweighted or weighted residual variances based on effective records contributions. In summary, VR and WG deregression methods seemed more appropriate for genomic prediction of test‐day traits without need for weighting in the genomic analysis, unless large differences in REL_EBV between training population animals exist.     

Improving accuracy of genomic prediction in Brangus cattle by adding animals with imputed low‐density SNP genotypes

Reliable genomic prediction of breeding values for quantitative traits requires the availability of sufficient number of animals with genotypes and phenotypes in the training set. As of 31 October 2016, there were 3,797 Brangus animals with genotypes and phenotypes. These Brangus animals were genotyped using different commercial SNP chips. Of them, the largest group consisted of 1,535 animals genotyped by the GGP‐LDV4 SNP chip. The remaining 2,262 genotypes were imputed to the SNP content of the GGP‐LDV4 chip, so that the number of animals available for training the genomic prediction models was more than doubled. The present study showed that the pooling of animals with both original or imputed 40K SNP genotypes substantially increased genomic prediction accuracies on the ten traits. By supplementing imputed genotypes, the relative gains in genomic prediction accuracies on estimated breeding values (EBV) were from 12.60% to 31.27%, and the relative gain in genomic prediction accuracies on de‐regressed EBV was slightly small (i.e. 0.87%–18.75%). The present study also compared the performance of five genomic prediction models and two cross‐validation methods. The five genomic models predicted EBV and de‐regressed EBV of the ten traits similarly well. Of the two cross‐validation methods, leave‐one‐out cross‐validation maximized the number of animals at the stage of training for genomic prediction. Genomic prediction accuracy (GPA) on the ten quantitative traits was validated in 1,106 newly genotyped Brangus animals based on the SNP effects estimated in the previous set of 3,797 Brangus animals, and they were slightly lower than GPA in the original data. The present study was the first to leverage currently available genotype and phenotype resources in order to harness genomic prediction in Brangus beef cattle.     

Influence of model specifications on the reliabilities of genomic prediction in a Swedish-Finnish red breed cattle population

Using a combined multi‐breed reference population, this study explored the influence of model specification and the effect of including a polygenic effect on the reliability of genomic breeding values (DGV and GEBV). The combined reference population consisted of 2986 Swedish Red Breed (SRB) and Finnish Ayrshire (FAY) dairy cattle. Bayesian methodology (common prior and mixture models with different prior distribution settings for the marker effects) as well as a best linear unbiased prediction with a genomic relationship matrix [genomic best linear unbiased predictor (GBLUP)] was used in the prediction of DGV. Mixture models including a polygenic effect were used to predict GEBV. In total, five traits with low, high and medium heritability were analysed. For the models using a mixture prior distribution, reliabilities of DGV tended to decrease with an increasing proportion of markers with small effects. The influence of the inclusion of a polygenic effect on the reliability of DGV varied across traits and model specifications. Average correlation between DGV with the Mendelian sampling term, across traits, was highest (R² = 0.25) for the GBLUP model and decreased with increasing proportion of markers with large effects. Reliabilities increased when DGV and parent average information were combined in an index. The GBLUP model with the largest gain across traits in the reliability of the index achieved the highest DGV mean reliability. However, the polygenic models showed to be less biased and more consistent in the estimation of DGV regardless of the model specifications compared with the mixture models without the polygenic effect.     

Core-dependent changes in genomic predictions using the Algorithm for Proven and Young in single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction

Single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction with the Algorithm for Proven and Young (APY) is a popular method for large-scale genomic evaluations. With the APY algorithm, animals are designated as core or noncore, and the computing resources to create the inverse of the genomic relationship matrix (GRM) are reduced by inverting only a portion of that matrix for core animals. However, using different core sets of the same size causes fluctuations in genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) up to one additive standard deviation without affecting prediction accuracy. About 2% of the variation in the GRM is noise. In the recursion formula for APY, the error term modeling the noise is different for every set of core animals, creating changes in breeding values. While average changes are small, and correlations between breeding values estimated with different core animals are close to 1.0, based on the normal distribution theory, outliers can be several times bigger than the average. Tests included commercial datasets from beef and dairy cattle and from pigs. Beyond a certain number of core animals, the prediction accuracy did not improve, but fluctuations decreased with more animals. Fluctuations were much smaller than the possible changes based on prediction error variance. GEBVs change over time even for animals with no new data as genomic relationships ties all the genotyped animals, causing reranking of top animals. In contrast, changes in nongenomic models without new data are small. Also, GEBV can change due to details in the model, such as redefinition of contemporary groups or unknown parent groups. In particular, increasing the fraction of blending of the GRM with a pedigree relationship matrix from 5% to 20% caused changes in GEBV up to 0.45 SD, with a correlation of GEBV > 0.99. Fluctuations in genomic predictions are part of genomic evaluation models and are also present without the APY algorithm when genomic evaluations are computed with updated data. The best approach to reduce the impact of fluctuations in genomic evaluations is to make selection decisions not on individual animals with limited individual accuracy but on groups of animals with high average accuracy.     

Accuracy of genomic prediction of purebreds for cross bred performance in pigs

In pig breeding, as the final product is a cross bred (CB) animal, the goal is to increase the CB performance. This goal requires different strategies for the implementation of genomic selection from what is currently implemented in, for example dairy cattle breeding. A good strategy is to estimate marker effects on the basis of CB performance and subsequently use them to select pure bred (PB) breeding animals. The objective of our study was to assess empirically the predictive ability (accuracy) of direct genomic values of PB for CB performance across two traits using CB and PB genomic and phenotypic data. We studied three scenarios in which genetic merit was predicted within each population, and four scenarios where PB genetic merit for CB performance was predicted based on either CB or a PB training data. Accuracy of prediction of PB genetic merit for CB performance based on CB training data ranged from 0.23 to 0.27 for gestation length (GLE), whereas it ranged from 0.11 to 0.22 for total number of piglets born (TNB). When based on PB training data, it ranged from 0.35 to 0.55 for GLE and from 0.30 to 0.40 for TNB. Our results showed that it is possible to predict PB genetic merit for CB performance using CB training data, but predictive ability was lower than training using PB training data. This result is mainly due to the structure of our data, which had small‐to‐moderate size of the CB training data set, low relationship between the CB training and the PB validation populations, and a high genetic correlation (0.94 for GLE and 0.90 for TNB) between the studied traits in PB and CB individuals, thus favouring selection on the basis of PB data.     

Comparison between genomic predictions using daughter yield deviation and conventional estimated breeding value as response variables

This study compared genomic predictions using conventional estimated breeding values (EBV) and daughter yield deviations (DYD) as response variables based on simulated data. Eight scenarios were simulated in regard to heritability (0.05 and 0.30), number of daughters per sire (30, 100, and unequal numbers with an average of 100 per sire) and numbers of genotyped sires (all or half of sires were genotyped). The simulated genome had a length of 1200 cM with 15,000 equally spaced Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers and 500 randomly distributed Quantitative trait locus (QTL). In the simulated scenarios, the EBV approach was as effective as or slightly better than the DYD approach at predicting breeding value, dependent on simulated scenarios and statistical models. Applying a Bayesian common prior model (the same prior distribution of marker effect variance) and a linear mixed model (GBLUP), the EBV and DYD approaches provided similar genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) reliabilities, except for scenarios with unequal numbers of daughters and half of sires without genotype, for which the EBV approach was superior to the DYD approach (by 1.2 and 2.4%). Using a Bayesian mixture prior model (mixture prior distribution of marker effect variance), the EBV approach resulted in slightly higher reliabilities of GEBV than the DYD approach (by 0.3-3.6% with an average of 1.9%), and more obvious in scenarios with low heritability, small or unequal numbers of daughters, and half of sires without genotype. Moreover, the results showed that the correlation between GEBV and conventional parent average (PA) was lower (corresponding to a relatively larger gain by including PA) when using the DYD approach than when using the EBV approach. Consequently, the two approaches led to similar reliability of an index combining GEBV and PA in most scenarios. These results indicate that EBV can be used as an alternative response variable for genomic prediction.     

Genomic evaluation using SNP‐ and haplotype‐based genomic relationship matrices in a closed line of Duroc pigs

A simulation analysis and real phenotype analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of three different relationship matrices on heritability estimation and prediction accuracy in a closed‐line breeding of Duroc pigs. The numerator relationship matrix (NRM), single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)‐based genomic relationship matrix (GRM) (G_S), and haplotype‐based GRM (G_H) were applied in this study. We used PorcineSNP60 genotype array data (38 114 SNPs) of 831 Duroc pigs with four selection traits. In both heritability estimation and prediction accuracy, the accuracy depended on the number of animals with records. For heritability estimation, a large difference in the results among three relationship matrices was not shown, but the trend of the estimated heritabilities between GRMs, that is G_S < G_H, was shown in this population. For the accuracy of prediction values in test animals, the accuracies of prediction values obtained by two GRMs were higher than that by the NRM in this population. The accuracies obtained by GRMs using animals with no records were lower than that by the NRM using animals with their performance records, but were close to that by the NRM using animals with full‐sib testing records.     

Genomic selection in American mink (Neovison vison) using a single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction model for size and quality traits graded on live mink

Genomic selection relies on single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are often collected using medium-density SNP arrays. In mink, no such array is available; instead, genotyping by sequencing (GBS) can be used to generate marker information. Here, we evaluated the effect of genomic selection for mink using GBS. We compared the estimated breeding values (EBVs) from single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (SSGBLUP) models to the EBV from ordinary pedigree-based BLUP models. We analyzed seven size and quality traits from the live grading of brown mink. The phenotype data consisted of ~20,600 records for the seven traits from the mink born between 2013 and 2016. Genotype data included 2,103 mink born between 2010 and 2014, mostly breeding animals. In total, 28,336 SNP markers from 391 scaffolds were available for genomic prediction. The pedigree file included 29,212 mink. The predictive ability was assessed by the correlation (r) between progeny trait deviation (PTD) and EBV, and the regression of PTD on EBV, using 5-fold cross-validation. For each fold, one-fifth of animals born in 2014 formed the validation set. For all traits, the SSGBLUP model resulted in higher accuracies than the BLUP model. The average increase in accuracy was 15% (between 3% for fur clarity and 28% for body weight). For three traits (body weight, silky appearance of the under wool, and guard hair thickness), the difference in r between the two models was significant (P < 0.05). For all traits, the regression slopes of PTD on EBV from SSGBLUP models were closer to 1 than regression slopes from BLUP models, indicating SSGBLUP models resulted in less bias of EBV for selection candidates than the BLUP models. However, the regression coefficients did not differ significantly. In conclusion, the SSGBLUP model is superior to conventional BLUP model in the accurate selection of superior animals, and, thus, it would increase genetic gain in a selective breeding program. In addition, this study shows that GBS data work well in genomic prediction in mink, demonstrating the potential of GBS for genomic selection in livestock species.     

Efficient approximation of reliabilities for single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor models with the Algorithm for Proven and Young

The objectives of this study were to develop an efficient algorithm for calculating prediction error variances (PEVs) for genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) models using the Algorithm for Proven and Young (APY), extend it to single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP), and apply this algorithm for approximating the theoretical reliabilities for single- and multiple-trait models in ssGBLUP. The PEV with APY was calculated by block sparse inversion, efficiently exploiting the sparse structure of the inverse of the genomic relationship matrix with APY. Single-step GBLUP reliabilities were approximated by combining reliabilities with and without genomic information in terms of effective record contributions. Multi-trait reliabilities relied on single-trait results adjusted using the genetic and residual covariance matrices among traits. Tests involved two datasets provided by the American Angus Association. A small dataset (Data1) was used for comparing the approximated reliabilities with the reliabilities obtained by the inversion of the left-hand side of the mixed model equations. A large dataset (Data2) was used for evaluating the computational performance of the algorithm. Analyses with both datasets used single-trait and three-trait models. The number of animals in the pedigree ranged from 167,951 in Data1 to 10,213,401 in Data2, with 50,000 and 20,000 genotyped animals for single-trait and multiple-trait analysis, respectively, in Data1 and 335,325 in Data2. Correlations between estimated and exact reliabilities obtained by inversion ranged from 0.97 to 0.99, whereas the intercept and slope of the regression of the exact on the approximated reliabilities ranged from 0.00 to 0.04 and from 0.93 to 1.05, respectively. For the three-trait model with the largest dataset (Data2), the elapsed time for the reliability estimation was 11 min. The computational complexity of the proposed algorithm increased linearly with the number of genotyped animals and with the number of traits in the model. This algorithm can efficiently approximate the theoretical reliability of genomic estimated breeding values in ssGBLUP with APY for large numbers of genotyped animals at a low cost.     

Impact of fitting dominance and additive effects on accuracy of genomic prediction of breeding values in layers

Most genomic prediction studies fit only additive effects in models to estimate genomic breeding values (GEBV). However, if dominance genetic effects are an important source of variation for complex traits, accounting for them may improve the accuracy of GEBV. We investigated the effect of fitting dominance and additive effects on the accuracy of GEBV for eight egg production and quality traits in a purebred line of brown layers using pedigree or genomic information (42K single‐nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panel). Phenotypes were corrected for the effect of hatch date. Additive and dominance genetic variances were estimated using genomic‐based [genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP)‐REML and BayesC] and pedigree‐based (PBLUP‐REML) methods. Breeding values were predicted using a model that included both additive and dominance effects and a model that included only additive effects. The reference population consisted of approximately 1800 animals hatched between 2004 and 2009, while approximately 300 young animals hatched in 2010 were used for validation. Accuracy of prediction was computed as the correlation between phenotypes and estimated breeding values of the validation animals divided by the square root of the estimate of heritability in the whole population. The proportion of dominance variance to total phenotypic variance ranged from 0.03 to 0.22 with PBLUP‐REML across traits, from 0 to 0.03 with GBLUP‐REML and from 0.01 to 0.05 with BayesC. Accuracies of GEBV ranged from 0.28 to 0.60 across traits. Inclusion of dominance effects did not improve the accuracy of GEBV, and differences in their accuracies between genomic‐based methods were small (0.01–0.05), with GBLUP‐REML yielding higher prediction accuracies than BayesC for egg production, egg colour and yolk weight, while BayesC yielded higher accuracies than GBLUP‐REML for the other traits. In conclusion, fitting dominance effects did not impact accuracy of genomic prediction of breeding values in this population.     

Determining the stability of accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values in future generations in commercial pig populations

Genomic information has a limited dimensionality (number of independent chromosome segments [M_e]) related to the effective population size. Under the additive model, the persistence of genomic accuracies over generations should be high when the nongenomic information (pedigree and phenotypes) is equivalent to M_e animals with high accuracy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the decay in accuracy over time and to compare the magnitude of decay with varying quantities of data and with traits of low and moderate heritability. The dataset included 161,897 phenotypic records for a growth trait (GT) and 27,669 phenotypic records for a fitness trait (FT) related to prolificacy in a population with dimensionality around 5,000. The pedigree included 404,979 animals from 2008 to 2020, of which 55,118 were genotyped. Two single-trait models were used with all ancestral data and sliding subsets of 3-, 2-, and 1-generation intervals. Single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) was used to compute genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV). Estimated accuracies were calculated by the linear regression (LR) method. The validation population consisted of single generations succeeding the training population and continued forward for all generations available. The average accuracy for the first generation after training with all ancestral data was 0.69 and 0.46 for GT and FT, respectively. The average decay in accuracy from the first generation after training to generation 9 was −0.13 and −0.19 for GT and FT, respectively. The persistence of accuracy improves with more data. Old data have a limited impact on the predictions for young animals for a trait with a large amount of information but a bigger impact for a trait with less information.     

Estimates of genetic variance and variance of predicted genetic merits using pedigree or genomic relationship matrices in six Brown Swiss cattle populations for different traits

The amount of variance captured in genetic estimations may depend on whether a pedigree‐based or genomic relationship matrix is used. The purpose of this study was to investigate the genetic variance as well as the variance of predicted genetic merits (PGM) using pedigree‐based or genomic relationship matrices in Brown Swiss cattle. We examined a range of traits in six populations amounting to 173 population‐trait combinations. A main aim was to determine how using different relationship matrices affect variance estimation. We calculated ratios between different types of estimates and analysed the impact of trait heritability and population size. The genetic variances estimated by REML using a genomic relationship matrix were always smaller than the variances that were similarly estimated using a pedigree‐based relationship matrix. The variances from the genomic relationship matrix became closer to estimates from a pedigree relationship matrix as heritability and population size increased. In contrast, variances of predicted genetic merits obtained using a genomic relationship matrix were mostly larger than variances of genetic merit predicted using pedigree‐based relationship matrix. The ratio of the genomic to pedigree‐based PGM variances decreased as heritability and population size rose. The increased variance among predicted genetic merits is important for animal breeding because this is one of the factors influencing genetic progress.     

The relative effect of genomic information on efficiency of Bayesian analysis of the mixed linear model with unknown variance

This work focuses on the effects of variable amount of genomic information in the Bayesian estimation of unknown variance components associated with single‐step genomic prediction. We propose a quantitative criterion for the amount of genomic information included in the model and use it to study the relative effect of genomic data on efficiency of sampling from the posterior distribution of parameters of the single‐step model when conducting a Bayesian analysis with estimating unknown variances. The rate of change of estimated variances was dependent on the amount of genomic information involved in the analysis, but did not depend on the Gibbs updating schemes applied for sampling realizations of the posterior distribution. Simulation revealed a gradual deterioration of convergence rates for the locations parameters when new genomic data were gradually added into the analysis. In contrast, the convergence of variance components showed continuous improvement under the same conditions. The sampling efficiency increased proportionally to the amount of genomic information. In addition, an optimal amount of genomic information in variance–covariance matrix that guaranty the most (computationally) efficient analysis was found to correspond a proportion of animals genotyped ***0.8. The proposed criterion yield a characterization of expected performance of the Gibbs sampler if the analysis is subject to adjustment of the amount of genomic data and can be used to guide researchers on how large a proportion of animals should be genotyped in order to attain an efficient analysis.     

Genomic prediction in a numerically small breed population using prioritized genetic markers from whole-genome sequence data

The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of genomic prediction of body weight and eating quality traits in a numerically small sheep population (Dorper sheep). Prediction was based on a large multi-breed/admixed reference population and using (a) 50k or 500k single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes, (b) imputed whole-genome sequencing data (~31 million), (c) selected SNPs from whole genome sequence data and (d) 50k SNP genotypes plus selected SNPs from whole-genome sequence data. Furthermore, the impact of using a breed-adjusted genomic relationship matrix on accuracy of genomic breeding value was assessed. The selection of genetic variants was based on an association study performed on imputed whole-genome sequence data in an independent population, which was chosen either randomly from the base population or according to higher genetic proximity to the target population. Genomic prediction was based on genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), and the accuracy of genomic prediction was assessed according to the correlation between genomic breeding value and corrected phenotypes divided by the square root of trait heritability. The accuracy of genomic prediction was between 0.20 and 0.30 across different traits based on common 50k SNP genotypes, which improved on average by 0.06 (absolute value) on average based on using prioritized genetic markers from whole-genome sequence data. Using prioritized genetic markers from a genetically more related GWAS population resulted in slightly higher prediction accuracy (0.02 absolute value) compared to genetic markers derived from a random GWAS population. Using high-density SNP genotypes or imputed whole-genome sequence data in GBLUP showed almost no improvement in genomic prediction accuracy however, accounting for different marker allele frequencies in reference population according to a breed-adjusted GRM resulted to on average 0.024 (absolute value) increase in accuracy of genomic prediction.     

Genomic estimation of additive and dominance effects and impact of accounting for dominance on accuracy of genomic evaluation in sheep populations

The objectives of this study were to estimate the additive and dominance variance component of several weight and ultrasound scanned body composition traits in purebred and combined cross‐bred sheep populations based on single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) marker genotypes and then to investigate the effect of fitting additive and dominance effects on accuracy of genomic evaluation. Additive and dominance variance components were estimated in a mixed model equation based on “average information restricted maximum likelihood” using additive and dominance (co)variances between animals calculated from 48,599 SNP marker genotypes. Genomic prediction was based on genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), and the accuracy of prediction was assessed based on a random 10‐fold cross‐validation. Across different weight and scanned body composition traits, dominance variance ranged from 0.0% to 7.3% of the phenotypic variance in the purebred population and from 7.1% to 19.2% in the combined cross‐bred population. In the combined cross‐bred population, the range of dominance variance decreased to 3.1% and 9.9% after accounting for heterosis effects. Accounting for dominance effects significantly improved the likelihood of the fitting model in the combined cross‐bred population. This study showed a substantial dominance genetic variance for weight and ultrasound scanned body composition traits particularly in cross‐bred population; however, improvement in the accuracy of genomic breeding values was small and statistically not significant. Dominance variance estimates in combined cross‐bred population could be overestimated if heterosis is not fitted in the model.     

Use of genomic recursions and algorithm for proven and young animals for single‐step genomic BLUP analyses – a simulation study

The purpose of this study was to examine accuracy of genomic selection via single‐step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) when the direct inverse of the genomic relationship matrix ( G ) is replaced by an approximation of G ^?1 based on recursions for young genotyped animals conditioned on a subset of proven animals, termed algorithm for proven and young animals (APY). With the efficient implementation, this algorithm has a cubic cost with proven animals and linear with young animals. Ten duplicate data sets mimicking a dairy cattle population were simulated. In a first scenario, genomic information for 20k genotyped bulls, divided in 7k proven and 13k young bulls, was generated for each replicate. In a second scenario, 5k genotyped cows with phenotypes were included in the analysis as young animals. Accuracies (average for the 10 replicates) in regular EBV were 0.72 and 0.34 for proven and young animals, respectively. When genomic information was included, they increased to 0.75 and 0.50. No differences between genomic EBV (GEBV) obtained with the regular G ^?1 and the approximated G ^?1 via the recursive method were observed. In the second scenario, accuracies in GEBV (0.76, 0.51 and 0.59 for proven bulls, young males and young females, respectively) were also higher than those in EBV (0.72, 0.35 and 0.49). Again, no differences between GEBV with regular G ^?1 and with recursions were observed. With the recursive algorithm, the number of iterations to achieve convergence was reduced from 227 to 206 in the first scenario and from 232 to 209 in the second scenario. Cows can be treated as young animals in APY without reducing the accuracy. The proposed algorithm can be implemented to reduce computing costs and to overcome current limitations on the number of genotyped animals in the ssGBLUP method.     

The impact of genomic relatedness between populations on the genomic estimated breeding values

In genomic selection, prediction accuracy is highly driven by the size of animals in the reference population(RP).Combining related populations from different countries and regions or using a related population with large size of RP has been considered to be viable strategies in cattle breeding. The genetic relationship between related populations is important for improving the genomic predictive ability. In this study, we used 122 French bulls as test individuals. The genomic estimated breeding values(GEBVs) evaluated using French RP, America RP and Chinese RP were compared.The results showed that the GEBVs were in higher concordance using French RP and American RP compared with using Chinese population. The persistence analysis, kinship analysis and the principal component analysis(PCA) were performed for 270 French bulls, 270 American bulls and 270 Chinese bulls to interpret the results. All the analyses illustrated that the genetic relationship between French bulls and American bulls was closer compared with Chinese bulls. Another reason could be the size of RP in China was smaller than the other two RPs. In conclusion, using RP of a related population to predict GEBVs of the animals in a target population is feasible when these two populations have a close genetic relationship and the related population is large.     

Evaluation of the utility of diagonal elements of the genomic relationship matrix as a diagnostic tool to detect mislabelled genotyped animals in a broiler chicken population

This study explored distributions of diagonal elements of genomic relationship matrix (G), evaluated the utility of G as a diagnostic tool to detect mislabelled animals in a genomic dataset and evaluated the effect of mislabelled animals on the accuracy of genomic evaluation. Populations of 10 000 animals were simulated with 60 000 SNP varying in allele frequency at each locus between 0.02 and 0.98. Diagonal elements of G were distributed with a single peak (mean = 1.00 ± 0.03) and ranged from 0.84 through 1.36. Mixed populations were also simulated: 7 000 animals with frequencies of second alleles ranging from 0.02 through 0.98 were combined with 1750 or 7000 animals with frequencies of second alleles ranging from 0.0 through 1.0. The resulting distributions of diagonal elements of G were bimodal. Body weight at 6 weeks was provided by Cobb-Vantress for broiler chickens, of which 3285 were genotyped for 57 636 SNP. Analysis used a combined genomic and pedigree relationship matrix; G was scaled using current allele frequencies. The distribution of diagonal elements was multimodal and ranged from 0.54 to 3.23. Animals with diagonal elements >1.5 were identified as coming from another chicken line or as having low call rates. Removal of mislabelled animals increased accuracy by 0.01. For the studied type of population, diagonal elements of G may be a useful tool to help identify mislabelled animals or secondary populations.     

Tag-SNP selection using Bayesian genomewide association study for growth traits in Hereford and Braford cattle

The aim of this study was to perform a Bayesian genomewide association study (GWAS) to identify genomic regions associated with growth traits in Hereford and Braford cattle, and to select Tag-SNPs to represent these regions in low-density panels useful for genomic predictions. In addition, we propose candidate genes through functional enrichment analysis associated with growth traits using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Phenotypic data from 126,290 animals and genotypes for 131 sires and 3,545 animals were used. The Tag-SNPs were selected with BayesB (π = 0.995) method to compose low-density panels. The number of Tag-single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) ranged between 79 and 103 SNP for the growth traits at weaning and between 78 and 100 SNP for the yearling growth traits. The average proportion of variance explained by Tag-SNP with BayesA was 0.29, 0.23, 0.32 and 0.19 for birthweight (BW), weaning weight (WW205), yearling weight (YW550) and postweaning gain (PWG345), respectively. For Tag-SNP with BayesA method accuracy values ranged from 0.13 to 0.30 for k-means and from 0.30 to 0.65 for random clustering of animals to compose reference and validation groups. Although genomic prediction accuracies were higher with the full marker panel, predictions with low-density panels retained on average 76% of the accuracy obtained with BayesB with full markers for growth traits. The MeSH analysis was able to translate genomic information providing biological meanings of more specific gene products related to the growth traits. The proposed Tag-SNP panels may be useful for future fine mapping studies and for lower-cost commercial genomic prediction applications.