Cargando…

Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection

BACKGROUND: Genomic selection, the use of markers across the whole genome, receives increasing amounts of attention and is having more and more impact on breeding programs. Development of statistical and computational methods to estimate breeding values based on markers is a very active area of rese...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bastiaansen, John W M, Bink, Marco C A M, Coster, Albart, Maliepaard, Chris, Calus, Mario P L
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2857840/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20380752
_version_ 1782180349757882368
author Bastiaansen, John W M
Bink, Marco C A M
Coster, Albart
Maliepaard, Chris
Calus, Mario P L
author_facet Bastiaansen, John W M
Bink, Marco C A M
Coster, Albart
Maliepaard, Chris
Calus, Mario P L
author_sort Bastiaansen, John W M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Genomic selection, the use of markers across the whole genome, receives increasing amounts of attention and is having more and more impact on breeding programs. Development of statistical and computational methods to estimate breeding values based on markers is a very active area of research. A simulated dataset was analyzed by participants of the QTLMAS XIII workshop, allowing a comparison of the ability of different methods to estimate genomic breeding values. METHODS: A best case scenario was analyzed by the organizers where QTL genotypes were known. Participants submitted estimated breeding values for 1000 unphenotyped individuals together with a description of the applied method(s). The submitted breeding values were evaluated for correlation with the simulated values (accuracy), rank correlation of the best 10% of individuals and error in predictions. Bias was tested by regression of simulated on estimated breeding values. RESULTS: The accuracy obtained from the best case scenario was 0.94. Six research groups submitted 19 sets of estimated breeding values. Methods that assumed the same variance for markers showed accuracies, measured as correlations between estimated and simulated values, ranging from 0.75 to 0.89 and rank correlations between 0.58 and 0.70. Methods that allowed different marker variances showed accuracies ranging from 0.86 to 0.94 and rank correlations between 0.69 and 0.82. Methods assuming equal marker variances were generally more biased and showed larger prediction errors. CONCLUSIONS: The best performing methods achieved very high accuracies, close to accuracies achieved in a best case scenario where QTL genotypes were known without error. Methods that allowed different marker variances generally outperformed methods that assumed equal marker variances. Genomic selection methods performed well compared to traditional, pedigree only, methods; all methods showed higher accuracies than those obtained for breeding values estimated solely on pedigree relationships.
format Text
id pubmed-2857840
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28578402010-04-22 Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection Bastiaansen, John W M Bink, Marco C A M Coster, Albart Maliepaard, Chris Calus, Mario P L BMC Proc Proceedings BACKGROUND: Genomic selection, the use of markers across the whole genome, receives increasing amounts of attention and is having more and more impact on breeding programs. Development of statistical and computational methods to estimate breeding values based on markers is a very active area of research. A simulated dataset was analyzed by participants of the QTLMAS XIII workshop, allowing a comparison of the ability of different methods to estimate genomic breeding values. METHODS: A best case scenario was analyzed by the organizers where QTL genotypes were known. Participants submitted estimated breeding values for 1000 unphenotyped individuals together with a description of the applied method(s). The submitted breeding values were evaluated for correlation with the simulated values (accuracy), rank correlation of the best 10% of individuals and error in predictions. Bias was tested by regression of simulated on estimated breeding values. RESULTS: The accuracy obtained from the best case scenario was 0.94. Six research groups submitted 19 sets of estimated breeding values. Methods that assumed the same variance for markers showed accuracies, measured as correlations between estimated and simulated values, ranging from 0.75 to 0.89 and rank correlations between 0.58 and 0.70. Methods that allowed different marker variances showed accuracies ranging from 0.86 to 0.94 and rank correlations between 0.69 and 0.82. Methods assuming equal marker variances were generally more biased and showed larger prediction errors. CONCLUSIONS: The best performing methods achieved very high accuracies, close to accuracies achieved in a best case scenario where QTL genotypes were known without error. Methods that allowed different marker variances generally outperformed methods that assumed equal marker variances. Genomic selection methods performed well compared to traditional, pedigree only, methods; all methods showed higher accuracies than those obtained for breeding values estimated solely on pedigree relationships. BioMed Central 2010-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC2857840/ /pubmed/20380752 Text en Copyright ©2010 Bastiaansen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Proceedings
Bastiaansen, John W M
Bink, Marco C A M
Coster, Albart
Maliepaard, Chris
Calus, Mario P L
Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection
title Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection
title_full Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection
title_fullStr Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection
title_short Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIII common dataset. I: genomic selection
title_sort comparison of analyses of the qtlmas xiii common dataset. i: genomic selection
topic Proceedings
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2857840/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20380752
work_keys_str_mv AT bastiaansenjohnwm comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxiiicommondatasetigenomicselection
AT binkmarcocam comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxiiicommondatasetigenomicselection
AT costeralbart comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxiiicommondatasetigenomicselection
AT maliepaardchris comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxiiicommondatasetigenomicselection
AT calusmariopl comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxiiicommondatasetigenomicselection