Cargando…

Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs

Historical data collection for genetic evaluation purposes is a common practice in animal populations; however, the larger the dataset, the higher the computing power needed to perform the analyses. Also, fitting the same model to historical and recent data may be inappropriate. Data truncation can...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bussiman, Fernando, Chen, Ching-Yi, Holl, Justin, Bermann, Matias, Legarra, Andres, Misztal, Ignacy, Lourenco, Daniela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10464514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37584978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skad273
_version_ 1785098486937550848
author Bussiman, Fernando
Chen, Ching-Yi
Holl, Justin
Bermann, Matias
Legarra, Andres
Misztal, Ignacy
Lourenco, Daniela
author_facet Bussiman, Fernando
Chen, Ching-Yi
Holl, Justin
Bermann, Matias
Legarra, Andres
Misztal, Ignacy
Lourenco, Daniela
author_sort Bussiman, Fernando
collection PubMed
description Historical data collection for genetic evaluation purposes is a common practice in animal populations; however, the larger the dataset, the higher the computing power needed to perform the analyses. Also, fitting the same model to historical and recent data may be inappropriate. Data truncation can reduce the number of equations to solve, consequently decreasing computing costs; however, the large volume of genotypes is responsible for most of the increase in computations. This study aimed to assess the impact of removing genotypes along with phenotypes and pedigree on the computing performance, reliability, and inflation of genomic predicted breeding value (GEBV) from single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor for selection candidates. Data from two pig lines, a terminal sire (L1) and a maternal line (L2), were analyzed in this study. Four analyses were implemented: growth and “weaning to finish” mortality on L1, pre-weaning and reproductive traits on L2. Four genotype removal scenarios were proposed: removing genotyped animals without phenotypes and progeny (noInfo), removing genotyped animals based on birth year (Age), the combination of noInfo and Age scenarios (noInfo + Age), and no genotype removal (AllGen). In all scenarios, phenotypes were removed, based on birth year, and three pedigree depths were tested: two and three generations traced back and using the entire pedigree. The full dataset contained 1,452,257 phenotypes for growth traits, 324,397 for weaning to finish mortality, 517,446 for pre-weaning traits, and 7,853,629 for reproductive traits in pure and crossbred pigs. Pedigree files for lines L1 and L2 comprised 3,601,369 and 11,240,865 animals, of which 168,734 and 170,121 were genotyped, respectively. In each truncation scenario, the linear regression method was used to assess the reliability and dispersion of GEBV for genotyped parents (born after 2019). The number of years of data that could be removed without harming reliability depended on the number of records, type of analyses (multitrait vs. single trait), the heritability of the trait, and data structure. All scenarios had similar reliabilities, except for noInfo, which performed better in the growth analysis. Based on the data used in this study, considering the last ten years of phenotypes, tracing three generations back in the pedigree, and removing genotyped animals not contributing own or progeny phenotypes, increases computing efficiency with no change in the ability to predict breeding values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10464514
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104645142023-08-30 Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs Bussiman, Fernando Chen, Ching-Yi Holl, Justin Bermann, Matias Legarra, Andres Misztal, Ignacy Lourenco, Daniela J Anim Sci Animal Genetics and Genomics Historical data collection for genetic evaluation purposes is a common practice in animal populations; however, the larger the dataset, the higher the computing power needed to perform the analyses. Also, fitting the same model to historical and recent data may be inappropriate. Data truncation can reduce the number of equations to solve, consequently decreasing computing costs; however, the large volume of genotypes is responsible for most of the increase in computations. This study aimed to assess the impact of removing genotypes along with phenotypes and pedigree on the computing performance, reliability, and inflation of genomic predicted breeding value (GEBV) from single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor for selection candidates. Data from two pig lines, a terminal sire (L1) and a maternal line (L2), were analyzed in this study. Four analyses were implemented: growth and “weaning to finish” mortality on L1, pre-weaning and reproductive traits on L2. Four genotype removal scenarios were proposed: removing genotyped animals without phenotypes and progeny (noInfo), removing genotyped animals based on birth year (Age), the combination of noInfo and Age scenarios (noInfo + Age), and no genotype removal (AllGen). In all scenarios, phenotypes were removed, based on birth year, and three pedigree depths were tested: two and three generations traced back and using the entire pedigree. The full dataset contained 1,452,257 phenotypes for growth traits, 324,397 for weaning to finish mortality, 517,446 for pre-weaning traits, and 7,853,629 for reproductive traits in pure and crossbred pigs. Pedigree files for lines L1 and L2 comprised 3,601,369 and 11,240,865 animals, of which 168,734 and 170,121 were genotyped, respectively. In each truncation scenario, the linear regression method was used to assess the reliability and dispersion of GEBV for genotyped parents (born after 2019). The number of years of data that could be removed without harming reliability depended on the number of records, type of analyses (multitrait vs. single trait), the heritability of the trait, and data structure. All scenarios had similar reliabilities, except for noInfo, which performed better in the growth analysis. Based on the data used in this study, considering the last ten years of phenotypes, tracing three generations back in the pedigree, and removing genotyped animals not contributing own or progeny phenotypes, increases computing efficiency with no change in the ability to predict breeding values. Oxford University Press 2023-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10464514/ /pubmed/37584978 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skad273 Text en © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Animal Genetics and Genomics
Bussiman, Fernando
Chen, Ching-Yi
Holl, Justin
Bermann, Matias
Legarra, Andres
Misztal, Ignacy
Lourenco, Daniela
Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
title Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
title_full Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
title_fullStr Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
title_full_unstemmed Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
title_short Boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
title_sort boundaries for genotype, phenotype, and pedigree truncation in genomic evaluations in pigs
topic Animal Genetics and Genomics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10464514/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37584978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skad273
work_keys_str_mv AT bussimanfernando boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs
AT chenchingyi boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs
AT holljustin boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs
AT bermannmatias boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs
AT legarraandres boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs
AT misztalignacy boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs
AT lourencodaniela boundariesforgenotypephenotypeandpedigreetruncationingenomicevaluationsinpigs