Search

Most traits in animal breeding, including feed efficiency traits in pigs, are affected by many genes with small effect and have a moderately high heritability between 0.1 and 0.5, which enables efficient selection. Since the microbiota composition in the gastrointestinal tract is also partly heritable and was shown to have a substantial effect on feed efficiency, the host genes affect the phenotype not only directly by altering metabolic pathways, but also indirectly by changing the microbiota composition. The effect m i of the microbiota composition on the breeding value g i of an animal i is the conditional expectation of its breeding value, given the vector φ i with microbiota frequencies, that is m i = E g i | φ i . The breeding value g i of an animal can therefore be decomposed into a heritable contribution m i that arises from an altered microbiota composition and a heritable contribution p i that arises from altered metabolic pathways within the animal, so g i = m i + p i . Instead of selecting for breeding value g ^ i , an index comprising the two components m ^ i and p ^ i with appropriate weights, that is I i = λ 1 m ^ i + λ 2 p ^ i , can be used. The present study shows how this breeding strategy can be applied in pig genomic selection breeding scheme for two feed efficiency traits and daily gain., (© 2019 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.)

Recovering the native genetic background of a breed and increasing the founder genome equivalent (FGE) that is contributed by a breed to the gene pool of the species can increase its value for conservation. The suitability of several strategies was compared, whereby a hypothetical multi-breed population, the core set, was used to approximate the genetic diversity of the species. Twenty-five generations of management were simulated based on genotypes of German Angler cattle. The scenarios were compared when the kinship reached 0.10. The native contribution (NC) increased in a population with 400 births per generation from 0.317 to 0.706, whereas 1,000 births enabled to reach 0.894. This scenario maximized the NC, constrained the native kinship, and the kinship of the core set so that its genetic diversity could not decrease. It increased the proportions of mainstream breeds because their genes were removed from the target breed. A substantial increase of the FGE was achieved in some other scenarios, which arose from reduced genetic overlap and from increased diversity within the breed. The latter factor is especially important for breeds with high contributions to the core set., (© 2019 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.)

Background: Currently, genomic prediction in cattle is largely based on panels of about 54k single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). However with the decreasing costs of and current advances in next-generation sequencing technologies, whole-genome sequence (WGS) data on large numbers of individuals is within reach. Availability of such data provides new opportunities for genomic selection, which need to be explored., Methods: This simulation study investigated how much predictive ability is gained by using WGS data under scenarios with QTL (quantitative trait loci) densities ranging from 45 to 132 QTL/Morgan and heritabilities ranging from 0.07 to 0.30, compared to different SNP densities, with emphasis on divergent dairy cattle breeds with small populations. The relative performances of best linear unbiased prediction (SNP-BLUP) and of a variable selection method with a mixture of two normal distributions (MixP) were also evaluated. Genomic predictions were based on within-population, across-population, and multi-breed reference populations., Results: The use of WGS data for within-population predictions resulted in small to large increases in accuracy for low to moderately heritable traits. Depending on heritability of the trait, and on SNP and QTL densities, accuracy increased by up to 31 %. The advantage of WGS data was more pronounced (7 to 92 % increase in accuracy depending on trait heritability, SNP and QTL densities, and time of divergence between populations) with a combined reference population and when using MixP. While MixP outperformed SNP-BLUP at 45 QTL/Morgan, SNP-BLUP was as good as MixP when QTL density increased to 132 QTL/Morgan., Conclusions: Our results show that, genomic predictions in numerically small cattle populations would benefit from a combination of WGS data, a multi-breed reference population, and a variable selection method.

Background: Genomic selection has become a standard tool in dairy cattle breeding. However, for other animal species, implementation of this technology is hindered by the high cost of genotyping. One way to reduce the routine costs is to genotype selection candidates with an SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) panel of reduced density. This strategy is investigated in the present paper. Methods are proposed for the approximation of SNP positions, for selection of SNPs to be included in the low-density panel, for genotype imputation, and for the estimation of the accuracy of genomic breeding values. The imputation method was developed for a situation in which selection candidates are genotyped with an SNP panel of reduced density but have high-density genotyped sires. The dams of selection candidates are not genotyped. The methods were applied to a sire line pig population with 895 German Piétrain boars genotyped with the PorcineSNP60 BeadChip., Results: Genotype imputation error rates were 0.133 for a 384 marker panel, 0.079 for a 768 marker panel, and 0.022 for a 3000 marker panel. Error rates for markers with approximated positions were slightly larger. Availability of high-density genotypes for close relatives of the selection candidates reduced the imputation error rate. The estimated decrease in the accuracy of genomic breeding values due to imputation errors was 3% for the 384 marker panel and negligible for larger panels, provided that at least one parent of the selection candidates was genotyped at high-density.Genomic breeding values predicted from deregressed breeding values with low reliabilities were more strongly correlated with the estimated BLUP breeding values than with the true breeding values. This was not the case when a shortened pedigree was used to predict BLUP breeding values, in which the parents of the individuals genotyped at high-density were considered unknown., Conclusions: Genomic selection with imputation from very low- to high-density marker panels is a promising strategy for the implementation of genomic selection at acceptable costs. A panel size of 384 markers can be recommended for selection candidates of a pig breeding program if at least one parent is genotyped at high-density, but this appears to be the lower bound.

Genomic selection refers to the use of dense, genome-wide markers for the prediction of breeding values (BV) and subsequent selection of breeding individuals. It has become a standard tool in livestock and plant breeding for accelerating genetic gain. The core of genomic selection is the prediction of a large number of marker effects from a limited number of observations. Various Bayesian methods that successfully cope with this challenge are known. Until now, the main research emphasis has been on additive genetic effects. Dominance coefficients of quantitative trait loci (QTLs), however, can also be large, even if dominance variance and inbreeding depression are relatively small. Considering dominance might contribute to the accuracy of genomic selection and serve as a guide for choosing mating pairs with good combining abilities. A general hierarchical Bayesian model for genomic selection that can realistically account for dominance is introduced. Several submodels are proposed and compared with respect to their ability to predict genomic BV, dominance deviations and genotypic values (GV) by stochastic simulation. These submodels differ in the way the dependency between additive and dominance effects is modelled. Depending on the marker panel, the inclusion of dominance effects increased the accuracy of GV by about 17% and the accuracy of genomic BV by 2% in the offspring. Furthermore, it slowed down the decrease of the accuracies in subsequent generations. It was possible to obtain accurate estimates of GV, which enables mate selection programmes.

Background: Multi-marker methods, which fit all markers simultaneously, were originally tailored for genomic selection purposes, but have proven to be useful also in association analyses, especially the so-called BayesC Bayesian methods. In a recent study, BayesD extended BayesC towards accounting for dominance effects and improved prediction accuracy and persistence in genomic selection. The current study investigated the power and precision of BayesC and BayesD in genome-wide association studies by means of stochastic simulations and applied these methods to a dairy cattle dataset. Methods: The simulation protocol was designed to mimic the genetic architecture of quantitative traits as realistically as possible. Special emphasis was put on the joint distribution of the additive and dominance effects of causative mutations. Additive marker effects were estimated by BayesC and additive and dominance effects by BayesD. The dependencies between additive and dominance effects were modelled in BayesD by choosing appropriate priors. A sliding-window approach was used. For each window, the R. Fernando window posterior probability of association was calculated and this was used for inference purpose. The power to map segregating causal effects and the mapping precision were assessed for various marker densities up to full sequence information and various window sizes. Results: Power to map a QTL increased with higher marker densities and larger window sizes. This held true for both methods. Method BayesD had improved power compared to BayesC. The increase in power was between -2 and 8% for causative genes that explained more than 2.5% of the genetic variance. In addition, inspection of the estimates of genomic window dominance variance allowed for inference about the magnitude of dominance at significant associations, which remains hidden in BayesC analysis. Mapping precision was not substantially improved by BayesD. Conclusions: BayesD improved power, but precision only slightly. Application of BayesD needs large datasets with genotypes and own performance records as phenotypes. Given the current efforts to establish cow reference populations in dairy cattle genomic selection schemes, such datasets are expected to be soon available, which will enable the application of BayesD for association mapping and genomic prediction purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]