Search

Background: In spite of being controversial and raising ethical concerns, the application of gene editing is more likely to be accepted when it contributes to improving animal welfare. One of the animal welfare and ethical issues in chicken breeding is chick culling, the killing of the male layer chicks after hatching due to the poor fattening performance. Although establishing dual-purpose chicken lines could solve this problem, unfavorable genetic correlations between egg and meat production traits hindered their competitiveness. Although it is also controversial in ethical terms, gene editing may accelerate genetic progress in dual-purpose chicken and alleviate the ethical concerns from chick culling. Results: The simulation compared the utility improvement in dual-purpose use under two breeding schemes: one consisting in the improvement of the laying hens, and the second in the improvement of a synthetic line obtained from a layer broiler cross. In each breeding scheme, the breeding programs were simulated with and without gene editing. Polygenic breeding values and 500 simulated quantitative trait loci (QTL) with different levels of pleiotropy caused negative correlations between egg production, meat production, and overall health. The results of the simulation demonstrated that genetic gain could be accelerated by at most 81% for several generations if gene editing was used. The actual increase in genetic gain depended on the number of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) being edited per animal. The rate of genetic improvement became equal in scenarios with and without gene editing after 20 generations. This is because the remaining segregating QTL had small effects and their edition would have negative overall health effects from potential off-target edits. Although gene editing can improve genetic gain in quantitative traits, it can only be recommended as long as QTL with reasonable effect sizes are segregating and detectable. Conclusions: This simulation demonstrates the potential of gene editing to accelerate the simultaneous improvement of negatively correlated traits. When the risk of negative consequences from gene editing persists, the number of SNPs to be edited should be chosen carefully to obtain the optimal genetic gain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of a selection index is that its use to select animals for breeding maximizes the profit of a breed in future generations. The profit of a breed is in general a quantity that predicts the satisfaction of future owners with their breed, and the satisfaction of the consumers with the products that are produced by the breed. Many traits, such as conformation traits and product quality traits have intermediate optima. Traditional selection index theory applies only to directional selection and cannot achieve any further improvement once the trait means have reached their optima. A well-founded theory is needed that extends the established selection index theory to cover directional as well as stabilizing selection as limiting cases, and that can be applied to maximize the profit of a breed in both situations. Results: The optimum selection index shifts the trait means towards the optima and, in the case of stabilizing selection, decreases the phenotypic variance, which causes the phenotypes to be closer to the optimum. The optimum index depends not only on the breeding values, but also on the squared breeding values, the allele contents of major quantitative trait loci (QTL), the QTL heterozygosities, the inbreeding coefficient of the animal, and the kinship of the animal with the population. Conclusion: The optimum selection index drives the alleles of major QTL to fixation when the trait mean approaches the optimum because decreasing the phenotypic variance shifts the trait values closer to the optimum, which increases the profit of the breed. The index weight on the kinship coefficient balances the increased genetic gain that can be achieved in future generations by outcrossing, and the increased genetic gain that can be achieved under stabilizing selection by reducing the phenotypic variance. In a model with dominance variance, it can also account for the effect of inbreeding depression. The combining ability between potential mating partners, which predicts the total merit of their offspring, could become an important parameter for mate allocation that could be used to further shift the phenotypes towards their optimum values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: During the last two decades, many QTL (quantitative trait locus) mapping experiments in pigs have been conducted using F2 crosses established from two outbred founder breeds. The founder breeds were frequently chosen from the Asian and European type breeds. A combination of next-generation sequencing, SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) genotyping technology using SNP-chips, and genotype imputation techniques, can be used to infer the sequence information of all F2 individuals in a cost-effective way. The aim of the present simulation study was to analyze the power and precision of genome-wide association studies (GWASs) with whole-genome sequence data in several types of F2 crosses, including pooled crosses. Methods: Based on a common historical population, three breeds representing two European type breeds (EU1 and EU2) and one Asian type breed (AS) were simulated. Two F2 designs of 500 individuals each were simulated. The cross EU1xEU2 (ASxEU2) was simulated using the phylogenetically closely related breeds EU1 and EU2 (or distantly related breeds AS and EU2) as the founder breeds. The simulated genomes comprised ten chromosomes, each with a length of 1 Morgan and whole-genome sequence information. A polygenic trait with a heritability of 0.5, which was affected by approximately 20 QTL per Morgan, was simulated. GWASs were conducted using single marker mixed linear models, either within the crosses or in their pooled datasets. Additionally, the studies were conducted in the breed EU2, which was a founder breed in both simulated crosses. Results: The power to map QTL was high (low) in the ASxEU2 (EU1xEU2) cross and was highest when the data of both crosses were analyzed jointly. By contrast, the mapping precision was the highest in the EU1xEU2 cross. Pooling data led to a precision that was in between the precision of the EU1xEU2 cross and the ASxEU2 cross. A higher mapping precision was observed for QTL segregating within a founder breed. Conclusions: These results suggest that the existing F2 crosses are promising databases for QTL mapping when the founder breeds are closely related or several crosses can be pooled. This conclusion is particularly applicable for QTL that segregate in a founder breed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]