Cargando…

Current status of genomic evaluation

Early application of genomic selection relied on SNP estimation with phenotypes or de-regressed proofs (DRP). Chips of 50k SNP seemed sufficient for an accurate estimation of SNP effects. Genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were composed of an index with parent average, direct genomic value, an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Misztal, Ignacy, Lourenco, Daniela, Legarra, Andres
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7183352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32267923
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa101
_version_ 1783526407730626560
author Misztal, Ignacy
Lourenco, Daniela
Legarra, Andres
author_facet Misztal, Ignacy
Lourenco, Daniela
Legarra, Andres
author_sort Misztal, Ignacy
collection PubMed
description Early application of genomic selection relied on SNP estimation with phenotypes or de-regressed proofs (DRP). Chips of 50k SNP seemed sufficient for an accurate estimation of SNP effects. Genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were composed of an index with parent average, direct genomic value, and deduction of a parental index to eliminate double counting. Use of SNP selection or weighting increased accuracy with small data sets but had minimal to no impact with large data sets. Efforts to include potentially causative SNP derived from sequence data or high-density chips showed limited or no gain in accuracy. After the implementation of genomic selection, EBV by BLUP became biased because of genomic preselection and DRP computed based on EBV required adjustments, and the creation of DRP for females is hard and subject to double counting. Genomic selection was greatly simplified by single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). This method based on combining genomic and pedigree relationships automatically creates an index with all sources of information, can use any combination of male and female genotypes, and accounts for preselection. To avoid biases, especially under strong selection, ssGBLUP requires that pedigree and genomic relationships are compatible. Because the inversion of the genomic relationship matrix (G) becomes costly with more than 100k genotyped animals, large data computations in ssGBLUP were solved by exploiting limited dimensionality of genomic data due to limited effective population size. With such dimensionality ranging from 4k in chickens to about 15k in cattle, the inverse of G can be created directly (e.g., by the algorithm for proven and young) at a linear cost. Due to its simplicity and accuracy, ssGBLUP is routinely used for genomic selection by the major chicken, pig, and beef industries. Single step can be used to derive SNP effects for indirect prediction and for genome-wide association studies, including computations of the P-values. Alternative single-step formulations exist that use SNP effects for genotyped or for all animals. Although genomics is the new standard in breeding and genetics, there are still some problems that need to be solved. This involves new validation procedures that are unaffected by selection, parameter estimation that accounts for all the genomic data used in selection, and strategies to address reduction in genetic variances after genomic selection was implemented.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7183352
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71833522020-04-29 Current status of genomic evaluation Misztal, Ignacy Lourenco, Daniela Legarra, Andres J Anim Sci Board Invited Review Early application of genomic selection relied on SNP estimation with phenotypes or de-regressed proofs (DRP). Chips of 50k SNP seemed sufficient for an accurate estimation of SNP effects. Genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were composed of an index with parent average, direct genomic value, and deduction of a parental index to eliminate double counting. Use of SNP selection or weighting increased accuracy with small data sets but had minimal to no impact with large data sets. Efforts to include potentially causative SNP derived from sequence data or high-density chips showed limited or no gain in accuracy. After the implementation of genomic selection, EBV by BLUP became biased because of genomic preselection and DRP computed based on EBV required adjustments, and the creation of DRP for females is hard and subject to double counting. Genomic selection was greatly simplified by single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). This method based on combining genomic and pedigree relationships automatically creates an index with all sources of information, can use any combination of male and female genotypes, and accounts for preselection. To avoid biases, especially under strong selection, ssGBLUP requires that pedigree and genomic relationships are compatible. Because the inversion of the genomic relationship matrix (G) becomes costly with more than 100k genotyped animals, large data computations in ssGBLUP were solved by exploiting limited dimensionality of genomic data due to limited effective population size. With such dimensionality ranging from 4k in chickens to about 15k in cattle, the inverse of G can be created directly (e.g., by the algorithm for proven and young) at a linear cost. Due to its simplicity and accuracy, ssGBLUP is routinely used for genomic selection by the major chicken, pig, and beef industries. Single step can be used to derive SNP effects for indirect prediction and for genome-wide association studies, including computations of the P-values. Alternative single-step formulations exist that use SNP effects for genotyped or for all animals. Although genomics is the new standard in breeding and genetics, there are still some problems that need to be solved. This involves new validation procedures that are unaffected by selection, parameter estimation that accounts for all the genomic data used in selection, and strategies to address reduction in genetic variances after genomic selection was implemented. Oxford University Press 2020-04-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7183352/ /pubmed/32267923 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa101 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Board Invited Review
Misztal, Ignacy
Lourenco, Daniela
Legarra, Andres
Current status of genomic evaluation
title Current status of genomic evaluation
title_full Current status of genomic evaluation
title_fullStr Current status of genomic evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Current status of genomic evaluation
title_short Current status of genomic evaluation
title_sort current status of genomic evaluation
topic Board Invited Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7183352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32267923
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa101
work_keys_str_mv AT misztalignacy currentstatusofgenomicevaluation
AT lourencodaniela currentstatusofgenomicevaluation
AT legarraandres currentstatusofgenomicevaluation