Search

Random regression (RR) models are recommended as an alternative to multiple-trait (MT) models for better capturing the variance-covariance structure over a trajectory and hence more accurate genetic evaluation of traits that are repeatedly measured and genetically change gradually over time. However, a limited number of studies have been done to empirically compare RR over a MT model to determine how much extra benefit could be achieved from one method over another. We compared the prediction accuracy of RR and MT models for growth traits of Australian meat sheep measured from 60 to 525 d, using 102,579 weight records from 24,872 animals. Variance components and estimated breeding values (EBVs) estimated at specific ages were compared and validated with forward prediction. The accuracy of EBVs obtained from the MT model was 0.58, 0.51, 0.54, and 0.56 for weaning, postweaning, yearling, and hogget weight stages, respectively. RR model produced accuracy estimates of 0.56, 0.51, 0.54, and 0.54 for equivalent weight stages. Regression of adjusted phenotype on EBVs was very similar between the MT and the RR models (P > 0.05). Although the RR model did not significantly increase the accuracy of predicting future progeny performance, there are other benefits of the model such as no limit to the number of records per animal, estimation of EBVs for early and late growth, no need for age correction. Therefore, RR can be considered a more flexible method for the genetic evaluation of Australian sheep for early and late growth, and no need for age correction., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.)

Background: Selection of livestock based on their robustness or sensitivity to environmental variation could help improve the efficiency of production systems, particularly in the light of climate change. Genetic variation in robustness arises from genotype-by-environment (G × E) interactions, with genotypes performing differently when animals are raised in contrasted environments. Understanding the nature of this genetic variation is essential to implement strategies to improve robustness. In this study, our aim was to explore the genetics of robustness in Australian sheep to different growth environments using linear reaction norm models (RNM), with post-weaning weight records of 22,513 lambs and 60 k single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). The use of scale-corrected genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) for the slope to account for scale-type G × E interactions was also investigated., Results: Additive genetic variance was observed for the slope of the RNM, with genetic correlations between low- and high-growth environments indicating substantial re-ranking of genotypes (0.44-0.49). The genetic variance increased from low- to high-growth environments. The heritability of post-weaning body weight ranged from 0.28 to 0.39. The genetic correlation between intercept and slope of the reaction norm for post-weaning body weight was low to moderate when based on the estimated (co)variance components but was much higher when based on back-solved SNP effects. An initial analysis suggested that a region on chromosome 11 affected both the intercept and the slope, but when the GEBV for the slope were conditioned on the GEBV for the intercept to remove the effect of scale-type G × E interactions on SNP effects for robustness, a single genomic region on chromosome 7 was found to be associated with robustness. This region included genes previously associated with growth traits and disease susceptibility in livestock., Conclusions: This study shows a significant genetic variation in the slope of RNM that could be used for selecting for increased robustness of sheep. Both scale-type and rank-type G × E interactions contributed to variation in the slope. The correction for scale effects of GEBV for the slope should be considered when analysing robustness using RNM. Overall, robustness appears to be a highly polygenic trait., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: The objectives of this study were to investigate the accuracy of genotype imputation from low (12k) to medium (50k Illumina-Ovine) SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) densities in purebred and crossbred Merino sheep based on a random or selected reference set and to evaluate the impact of using imputed genotypes on accuracy of genomic prediction., Methods: Imputation validation sets were composed of random purebred or crossbred Merinos, while imputation reference sets were of variable sizes and included random purebred or crossbred Merinos or a group of animals that were selected based on high genetic relatedness to animals in the validation set. The Beagle software program was used for imputation and accuracy of imputation was assessed based on the Pearson correlation coefficient between observed and imputed genotypes. Genomic evaluation was performed based on genomic best linear unbiased prediction and its accuracy was evaluated as the Pearson correlation coefficient between genomic estimated breeding values using either observed (12k/50k) or imputed genotypes with varying levels of imputation accuracy and accurate estimated breeding values based on progeny-tests., Results: Imputation accuracy increased as the size of the reference set increased. However, accuracy was higher for purebred Merinos that were imputed from other purebred Merinos (on average 0.90 to 0.95 based on 1000 to 3000 animals) than from crossbred Merinos (0.78 to 0.87 based on 1000 to 3000 animals) or from non-Merino purebreds (on average 0.50). The imputation accuracy for crossbred Merinos based on 1000 to 3000 other crossbred Merino ranged from 0.86 to 0.88. Considerably higher imputation accuracy was observed when a selected reference set with a high genetic relationship to target animals was used vs. a random reference set of the same size (0.96 vs. 0.88, respectively). Accuracy of genomic prediction based on 50k genotypes imputed with high accuracy (0.88 to 0.99) decreased only slightly (0.0 to 0.67% across traits) compared to using observed 50k genotypes. Accuracy of genomic prediction based on observed 12k genotypes was higher than accuracy based on lowly accurate (0.62 to 0.86) imputed 50k genotypes.