Cargando…

Accuracy of genomic BLUP when considering a genomic relationship matrix based on the number of the largest eigenvalues: a simulation study

BACKGROUND: The dimensionality of genomic information is limited by the number of independent chromosome segments (M(e)), which is a function of the effective population size. This dimensionality can be determined approximately by singular value decomposition of the gene content matrix, by eigenvalu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pocrnic, Ivan, Lourenco, Daniela A. L., Masuda, Yutaka, Misztal, Ignacy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6907194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31830899
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12711-019-0516-0
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The dimensionality of genomic information is limited by the number of independent chromosome segments (M(e)), which is a function of the effective population size. This dimensionality can be determined approximately by singular value decomposition of the gene content matrix, by eigenvalue decomposition of the genomic relationship matrix (GRM), or by the number of core animals in the algorithm for proven and young (APY) that maximizes the accuracy of genomic prediction. In the latter, core animals act as proxies to linear combinations of M(e). Field studies indicate that a moderate accuracy of genomic selection is achieved with a small dataset, but that further improvement of the accuracy requires much more data. When only one quarter of the optimal number of core animals are used in the APY algorithm, the accuracy of genomic selection is only slightly below the optimal value. This suggests that genomic selection works on clusters of M(e). RESULTS: The simulation included datasets with different population sizes and amounts of phenotypic information. Computations were done by genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) with selected eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors of the GRM set to zero. About four eigenvalues in the GRM explained 10% of the genomic variation, and less than 2% of the total eigenvalues explained 50% of the genomic variation. With limited phenotypic information, the accuracy of GBLUP was close to the peak where most of the smallest eigenvalues were set to zero. With a large amount of phenotypic information, accuracy increased as smaller eigenvalues were added. CONCLUSIONS: A small amount of phenotypic data is sufficient to estimate only the effects of the largest eigenvalues and the associated eigenvectors that contain a large fraction of the genomic information, and a very large amount of data is required to estimate the remaining eigenvalues that account for a limited amount of genomic information. Core animals in the APY algorithm act as proxies of almost the same number of eigenvalues. By using an eigenvalues-based approach, it was possible to explain why the moderate accuracy of genomic selection based on small datasets only increases slowly as more data are added.