Cargando…

Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection

Genomewide selection is hailed for its ability to facilitate greater genetic gains per unit time. Over breeding cycles, the requisite linkage disequilibrium (LD) between quantitative trait loci and markers is expected to change as a result of recombination, selection, and drift, leading to a decay i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Neyhart, Jeffrey L., Tiede, Tyler, Lorenz, Aaron J., Smith, Kevin P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Genetics Society of America 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28315831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.040550
_version_ 1783235639694589952
author Neyhart, Jeffrey L.
Tiede, Tyler
Lorenz, Aaron J.
Smith, Kevin P.
author_facet Neyhart, Jeffrey L.
Tiede, Tyler
Lorenz, Aaron J.
Smith, Kevin P.
author_sort Neyhart, Jeffrey L.
collection PubMed
description Genomewide selection is hailed for its ability to facilitate greater genetic gains per unit time. Over breeding cycles, the requisite linkage disequilibrium (LD) between quantitative trait loci and markers is expected to change as a result of recombination, selection, and drift, leading to a decay in prediction accuracy. Previous research has identified the need to update the training population using data that may capture new LD generated over breeding cycles; however, optimal methods of updating have not been explored. In a barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) breeding simulation experiment, we examined prediction accuracy and response to selection when updating the training population each cycle with the best predicted lines, the worst predicted lines, both the best and worst predicted lines, random lines, criterion-selected lines, or no lines. In the short term, we found that updating with the best predicted lines or the best and worst predicted lines resulted in high prediction accuracy and genetic gain, but in the long term, all methods (besides not updating) performed similarly. We also examined the impact of including all data in the training population or only the most recent data. Though patterns among update methods were similar, using a smaller but more recent training population provided a slight advantage in prediction accuracy and genetic gain. In an actual breeding program, a breeder might desire to gather phenotypic data on lines predicted to be the best, perhaps to evaluate possible cultivars. Therefore, our results suggest that an optimal method of updating the training population is also very practical.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5427505
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Genetics Society of America
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54275052017-05-12 Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection Neyhart, Jeffrey L. Tiede, Tyler Lorenz, Aaron J. Smith, Kevin P. G3 (Bethesda) Genomic Selection Genomewide selection is hailed for its ability to facilitate greater genetic gains per unit time. Over breeding cycles, the requisite linkage disequilibrium (LD) between quantitative trait loci and markers is expected to change as a result of recombination, selection, and drift, leading to a decay in prediction accuracy. Previous research has identified the need to update the training population using data that may capture new LD generated over breeding cycles; however, optimal methods of updating have not been explored. In a barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) breeding simulation experiment, we examined prediction accuracy and response to selection when updating the training population each cycle with the best predicted lines, the worst predicted lines, both the best and worst predicted lines, random lines, criterion-selected lines, or no lines. In the short term, we found that updating with the best predicted lines or the best and worst predicted lines resulted in high prediction accuracy and genetic gain, but in the long term, all methods (besides not updating) performed similarly. We also examined the impact of including all data in the training population or only the most recent data. Though patterns among update methods were similar, using a smaller but more recent training population provided a slight advantage in prediction accuracy and genetic gain. In an actual breeding program, a breeder might desire to gather phenotypic data on lines predicted to be the best, perhaps to evaluate possible cultivars. Therefore, our results suggest that an optimal method of updating the training population is also very practical. Genetics Society of America 2017-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5427505/ /pubmed/28315831 http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.040550 Text en Copyright © 2017 Neyhart et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Genomic Selection
Neyhart, Jeffrey L.
Tiede, Tyler
Lorenz, Aaron J.
Smith, Kevin P.
Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection
title Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection
title_full Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection
title_fullStr Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection
title_short Evaluating Methods of Updating Training Data in Long-Term Genomewide Selection
title_sort evaluating methods of updating training data in long-term genomewide selection
topic Genomic Selection
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28315831
http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.040550
work_keys_str_mv AT neyhartjeffreyl evaluatingmethodsofupdatingtrainingdatainlongtermgenomewideselection
AT tiedetyler evaluatingmethodsofupdatingtrainingdatainlongtermgenomewideselection
AT lorenzaaronj evaluatingmethodsofupdatingtrainingdatainlongtermgenomewideselection
AT smithkevinp evaluatingmethodsofupdatingtrainingdatainlongtermgenomewideselection