Cargando…

Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants

BACKGROUND: Increasing marker density was proposed to have potential to improve the accuracy of genomic prediction for quantitative traits; whole-sequence data is expected to give the best accuracy of prediction, since all causal mutations that underlie a trait are expected to be included. However,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Chunyan, Kemp, Robert Alan, Stothard, Paul, Wang, Zhiquan, Boddicker, Nicholas, Krivushin, Kirill, Dekkers, Jack, Plastow, Graham
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5889553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29625549
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-018-0387-9
_version_ 1783312720717676544
author Zhang, Chunyan
Kemp, Robert Alan
Stothard, Paul
Wang, Zhiquan
Boddicker, Nicholas
Krivushin, Kirill
Dekkers, Jack
Plastow, Graham
author_facet Zhang, Chunyan
Kemp, Robert Alan
Stothard, Paul
Wang, Zhiquan
Boddicker, Nicholas
Krivushin, Kirill
Dekkers, Jack
Plastow, Graham
author_sort Zhang, Chunyan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Increasing marker density was proposed to have potential to improve the accuracy of genomic prediction for quantitative traits; whole-sequence data is expected to give the best accuracy of prediction, since all causal mutations that underlie a trait are expected to be included. However, in cattle and chicken, this assumption is not supported by empirical studies. Our objective was to compare the accuracy of genomic prediction of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panels of 80K, imputed 650K, and whole-genome sequence variants using GBLUP, BayesB and BayesRC methods, with the ultimate purpose to determine the optimal method to increase genetic gain for feed efficiency in pigs. RESULTS: Phenotypes of average daily feed intake (ADFI), average daily gain (ADG), ultrasound backfat depth (FAT), and loin muscle depth (LMD) were available for 1363 Duroc boars from a commercial breeding program. Genotype imputation accuracies reached 92.1% from 80K to 650K and 85.6% from 650K to whole-genome sequence variants. Average accuracies across methods and marker densities of genomic prediction of ADFI, FAT, LMD and ADG were 0.40, 0.65, 0.30 and 0.15, respectively. For ADFI and FAT, BayesB outperformed GBLUP, but increasing marker density had little advantage for genomic prediction. For ADG and LMD, GBLUP outperformed BayesB, while BayesRC based on whole-genome sequence data gave the best accuracies and reached up to 0.35 for LMD and 0.25 for ADG. CONCLUSIONS: Use of genomic information was beneficial for prediction of ADFI and FAT but not for that of ADG and LMD compared to pedigree-based estimates. BayesB based on 80K SNPs gave the best genomic prediction accuracy for ADFI and FAT, while BayesRC based on whole-genome sequence data performed best for ADG and LMD. We suggest that these differences between traits in the effect of marker density and method on accuracy of genomic prediction are mainly due to the underlying genetic architecture of the traits. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12711-018-0387-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5889553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58895532018-04-10 Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants Zhang, Chunyan Kemp, Robert Alan Stothard, Paul Wang, Zhiquan Boddicker, Nicholas Krivushin, Kirill Dekkers, Jack Plastow, Graham Genet Sel Evol Research Article BACKGROUND: Increasing marker density was proposed to have potential to improve the accuracy of genomic prediction for quantitative traits; whole-sequence data is expected to give the best accuracy of prediction, since all causal mutations that underlie a trait are expected to be included. However, in cattle and chicken, this assumption is not supported by empirical studies. Our objective was to compare the accuracy of genomic prediction of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panels of 80K, imputed 650K, and whole-genome sequence variants using GBLUP, BayesB and BayesRC methods, with the ultimate purpose to determine the optimal method to increase genetic gain for feed efficiency in pigs. RESULTS: Phenotypes of average daily feed intake (ADFI), average daily gain (ADG), ultrasound backfat depth (FAT), and loin muscle depth (LMD) were available for 1363 Duroc boars from a commercial breeding program. Genotype imputation accuracies reached 92.1% from 80K to 650K and 85.6% from 650K to whole-genome sequence variants. Average accuracies across methods and marker densities of genomic prediction of ADFI, FAT, LMD and ADG were 0.40, 0.65, 0.30 and 0.15, respectively. For ADFI and FAT, BayesB outperformed GBLUP, but increasing marker density had little advantage for genomic prediction. For ADG and LMD, GBLUP outperformed BayesB, while BayesRC based on whole-genome sequence data gave the best accuracies and reached up to 0.35 for LMD and 0.25 for ADG. CONCLUSIONS: Use of genomic information was beneficial for prediction of ADFI and FAT but not for that of ADG and LMD compared to pedigree-based estimates. BayesB based on 80K SNPs gave the best genomic prediction accuracy for ADFI and FAT, while BayesRC based on whole-genome sequence data performed best for ADG and LMD. We suggest that these differences between traits in the effect of marker density and method on accuracy of genomic prediction are mainly due to the underlying genetic architecture of the traits. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12711-018-0387-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-04-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5889553/ /pubmed/29625549 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-018-0387-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is 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 you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhang, Chunyan
Kemp, Robert Alan
Stothard, Paul
Wang, Zhiquan
Boddicker, Nicholas
Krivushin, Kirill
Dekkers, Jack
Plastow, Graham
Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants
title Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants
title_full Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants
title_fullStr Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants
title_full_unstemmed Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants
title_short Genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in Duroc pigs using 80K, 650K and whole-genome sequence variants
title_sort genomic evaluation of feed efficiency component traits in duroc pigs using 80k, 650k and whole-genome sequence variants
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5889553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29625549
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-018-0387-9
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangchunyan genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT kemprobertalan genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT stothardpaul genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT wangzhiquan genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT boddickernicholas genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT krivushinkirill genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT dekkersjack genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants
AT plastowgraham genomicevaluationoffeedefficiencycomponenttraitsindurocpigsusing80k650kandwholegenomesequencevariants