Cargando…

Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information

Bayesian (via Gibbs sampling) and empirical BLUP (EBLUP) estimation of fixed effects and breeding values were compared by simulation. Combinations of two simulation models (with or without effect of contemporary group (CG)), three selection schemes (random, phenotypic and BLUP selection), two levels...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schenkel, Flávio S, Schaeffer, Lawrence R, Boettcher, Paul J
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2002
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2705422/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11929624
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-34-1-41
_version_ 1782168996881104896
author Schenkel, Flávio S
Schaeffer, Lawrence R
Boettcher, Paul J
author_facet Schenkel, Flávio S
Schaeffer, Lawrence R
Boettcher, Paul J
author_sort Schenkel, Flávio S
collection PubMed
description Bayesian (via Gibbs sampling) and empirical BLUP (EBLUP) estimation of fixed effects and breeding values were compared by simulation. Combinations of two simulation models (with or without effect of contemporary group (CG)), three selection schemes (random, phenotypic and BLUP selection), two levels of heritability (0.20 and 0.50) and two levels of pedigree information (0% and 15% randomly missing) were considered. Populations consisted of 450 animals spread over six discrete generations. An infinitesimal additive genetic animal model was assumed while simulating data. EBLUP and Bayesian estimates of CG effects and breeding values were, in all situations, essentially the same with respect to Spearman's rank correlation between true and estimated values. Bias and mean square error (MSE) of EBLUP and Bayesian estimates of CG effects and breeding values showed the same pattern over the range of simulated scenarios. Methods were not biased by phenotypic and BLUP selection when pedigree information was complete, albeit MSE of estimated breeding values increased for situations where CG effects were present. Estimation of breeding values by Bayesian and EBLUP was similarly affected by joint effect of phenotypic or BLUP selection and randomly missing pedigree information. For both methods, bias and MSE of estimated breeding values and CG effects substantially increased across generations.
format Text
id pubmed-2705422
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2002
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27054222009-07-03 Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information Schenkel, Flávio S Schaeffer, Lawrence R Boettcher, Paul J Genet Sel Evol Research Bayesian (via Gibbs sampling) and empirical BLUP (EBLUP) estimation of fixed effects and breeding values were compared by simulation. Combinations of two simulation models (with or without effect of contemporary group (CG)), three selection schemes (random, phenotypic and BLUP selection), two levels of heritability (0.20 and 0.50) and two levels of pedigree information (0% and 15% randomly missing) were considered. Populations consisted of 450 animals spread over six discrete generations. An infinitesimal additive genetic animal model was assumed while simulating data. EBLUP and Bayesian estimates of CG effects and breeding values were, in all situations, essentially the same with respect to Spearman's rank correlation between true and estimated values. Bias and mean square error (MSE) of EBLUP and Bayesian estimates of CG effects and breeding values showed the same pattern over the range of simulated scenarios. Methods were not biased by phenotypic and BLUP selection when pedigree information was complete, albeit MSE of estimated breeding values increased for situations where CG effects were present. Estimation of breeding values by Bayesian and EBLUP was similarly affected by joint effect of phenotypic or BLUP selection and randomly missing pedigree information. For both methods, bias and MSE of estimated breeding values and CG effects substantially increased across generations. BioMed Central 2002-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC2705422/ /pubmed/11929624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-34-1-41 Text en Copyright © 2002 INRA, EDP Sciences
spellingShingle Research
Schenkel, Flávio S
Schaeffer, Lawrence R
Boettcher, Paul J
Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
title Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
title_full Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
title_fullStr Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
title_short Comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using Bayesian and empirical BLUP estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
title_sort comparison between estimation of breeding values and fixed effects using bayesian and empirical blup estimation under selection on parents and missing pedigree information
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2705422/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11929624
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-34-1-41
work_keys_str_mv AT schenkelflavios comparisonbetweenestimationofbreedingvaluesandfixedeffectsusingbayesianandempiricalblupestimationunderselectiononparentsandmissingpedigreeinformation
AT schaefferlawrencer comparisonbetweenestimationofbreedingvaluesandfixedeffectsusingbayesianandempiricalblupestimationunderselectiononparentsandmissingpedigreeinformation
AT boettcherpaulj comparisonbetweenestimationofbreedingvaluesandfixedeffectsusingbayesianandempiricalblupestimationunderselectiononparentsandmissingpedigreeinformation