Cargando…

The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection

In single-step analyses, missing genotypes are explicitly or implicitly imputed, and this requires centering the observed genotypes using the means of the unselected founders. If genotypes are only available for selected individuals, centering on the unselected founder mean is not straightforward. H...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hsu, Wan-Ling, Garrick, Dorian J., Fernando, Rohan L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Genetics Society of America 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5555473/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28642364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.043596
_version_ 1783256919974084608
author Hsu, Wan-Ling
Garrick, Dorian J.
Fernando, Rohan L.
author_facet Hsu, Wan-Ling
Garrick, Dorian J.
Fernando, Rohan L.
author_sort Hsu, Wan-Ling
collection PubMed
description In single-step analyses, missing genotypes are explicitly or implicitly imputed, and this requires centering the observed genotypes using the means of the unselected founders. If genotypes are only available for selected individuals, centering on the unselected founder mean is not straightforward. Here, computer simulation is used to study an alternative analysis that does not require centering genotypes but fits the mean [Formula: see text] of unselected individuals as a fixed effect. Starting with observed diplotypes from 721 cattle, a five-generation population was simulated with sire selection to produce 40,000 individuals with phenotypes, of which the 1000 sires had genotypes. The next generation of 8000 genotyped individuals was used for validation. Evaluations were undertaken with (J) or without (N) [Formula: see text] when marker covariates were not centered; and with (JC) or without (C) [Formula: see text] when all observed and imputed marker covariates were centered. Centering did not influence accuracy of genomic prediction, but fitting [Formula: see text] did. Accuracies were improved when the panel comprised only quantitative trait loci (QTL); models JC and J had accuracies of 99.4%, whereas models C and N had accuracies of 90.2%. When only markers were in the panel, the 4 models had accuracies of 80.4%. In panels that included QTL, fitting [Formula: see text] in the model improved accuracy, but had little impact when the panel contained only markers. In populations undergoing selection, fitting [Formula: see text] in the model is recommended to avoid bias and reduction in prediction accuracy due to selection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5555473
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Genetics Society of America
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55554732017-08-17 The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection Hsu, Wan-Ling Garrick, Dorian J. Fernando, Rohan L. G3 (Bethesda) Investigations In single-step analyses, missing genotypes are explicitly or implicitly imputed, and this requires centering the observed genotypes using the means of the unselected founders. If genotypes are only available for selected individuals, centering on the unselected founder mean is not straightforward. Here, computer simulation is used to study an alternative analysis that does not require centering genotypes but fits the mean [Formula: see text] of unselected individuals as a fixed effect. Starting with observed diplotypes from 721 cattle, a five-generation population was simulated with sire selection to produce 40,000 individuals with phenotypes, of which the 1000 sires had genotypes. The next generation of 8000 genotyped individuals was used for validation. Evaluations were undertaken with (J) or without (N) [Formula: see text] when marker covariates were not centered; and with (JC) or without (C) [Formula: see text] when all observed and imputed marker covariates were centered. Centering did not influence accuracy of genomic prediction, but fitting [Formula: see text] did. Accuracies were improved when the panel comprised only quantitative trait loci (QTL); models JC and J had accuracies of 99.4%, whereas models C and N had accuracies of 90.2%. When only markers were in the panel, the 4 models had accuracies of 80.4%. In panels that included QTL, fitting [Formula: see text] in the model improved accuracy, but had little impact when the panel contained only markers. In populations undergoing selection, fitting [Formula: see text] in the model is recommended to avoid bias and reduction in prediction accuracy due to selection. Genetics Society of America 2017-06-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5555473/ /pubmed/28642364 http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.043596 Text en Copyright © 2017 Hsu 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 Investigations
Hsu, Wan-Ling
Garrick, Dorian J.
Fernando, Rohan L.
The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection
title The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection
title_full The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection
title_fullStr The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection
title_full_unstemmed The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection
title_short The Accuracy and Bias of Single-Step Genomic Prediction for Populations Under Selection
title_sort accuracy and bias of single-step genomic prediction for populations under selection
topic Investigations
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5555473/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28642364
http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.043596
work_keys_str_mv AT hsuwanling theaccuracyandbiasofsinglestepgenomicpredictionforpopulationsunderselection
AT garrickdorianj theaccuracyandbiasofsinglestepgenomicpredictionforpopulationsunderselection
AT fernandorohanl theaccuracyandbiasofsinglestepgenomicpredictionforpopulationsunderselection
AT hsuwanling accuracyandbiasofsinglestepgenomicpredictionforpopulationsunderselection
AT garrickdorianj accuracyandbiasofsinglestepgenomicpredictionforpopulationsunderselection
AT fernandorohanl accuracyandbiasofsinglestepgenomicpredictionforpopulationsunderselection