Comparison of genomic predictions using genomic relationship matrices built with different weighting factors to account for locus-specific variances.

Various models have been used for genomic prediction. Bayesian variable selection models often predict more accurate genomic breeding values than genomic BLUP (GBLUP), but GBLUP is generally preferred for routine genomic evaluations because of low computational demand. The objective of this study was to achieve the benefits of both models using results from Bayesian models and genome-wide association studies as weights on single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers when constructing the genomic matrix (G-matrix) for genomic prediction. The data comprised 5,221 progeny-tested bulls from the Nordic Holstein population. The animals were genotyped using the Illumina Bovine SNP50 BeadChip (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA). Weighting factors in this investigation were the posterior SNP variance, the square of the posterior SNP effect, and the corresponding minus base-10 logarithm of the marker association P-value [-log10(P)] of a t-test obtained from the analysis using a Bayesian mixture model with 4 normal distributions, the square of the estimated SNP effect, and the corresponding -log10(P) of a t-test obtained from the analysis using a classical genome-wide association study model (linear regression model). The weights were derived from the analysis based on data sets that were 0, 1, 3, or 5 yr before performing genomic prediction. In building a G-matrix, the weights were assigned either to each marker (single-marker weighting) or to each group of approximately 5 to 150 markers (group-marker weighting). The analysis was carried out for milk yield, fat yield, protein yield, fertility, and mastitis. Deregressed proofs (DRP) were used as response variables to predict genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV). Averaging over the 5 traits, the Bayesian model led to 2.0% higher reliability of GEBV than the GBLUP model with an original unweighted G-matrix. The superiority of using a GBLUP with weighted G-matrix over GBLUP with an original unweighted G-matrix was the largest when using a weighting factor of posterior variance, resulting in 1.7 percentage points higher reliability. The second best weighting factors were -log10 (P-value) of a t-test corresponding to the square of the posterior SNP effect from the Bayesian model and -log10 (P-value) of a t-test corresponding to the square of the estimated SNP effect from the linear regression model, followed by the square of estimated SNP effect and the square of the posterior SNP effect. In addition, group-marker weighting performed better than single-marker weighting in terms of reducing bias of GEBV, and also slightly increased prediction reliability. The differences between weighting factors and scenarios were larger in prediction bias than in prediction accuracy. Finally, weights derived from a data set having a lag up to 3 yr did not reduce reliability of GEBV. The results indicate that posterior SNP variance estimated from a Bayesian mixture model is a good alternative weighting factor, and common weights on group markers with a size of 30 markers is a good strategy when using markers of the 50,000-marker (50K) chip. In a population with gradually increasing reference data, the weights can be updated once every 3 yr.

Su G ，Christensen OF ，Janss L ，Lund MS ... -  《-》

Use of a Bayesian model including QTL markers increases prediction reliability when test animals are distant from the reference population.

Relatedness between reference and test animals has an important effect on the reliability of genomic prediction for test animals. Because genomic prediction has been widely applied in practical cattle breeding and bulls have been selected according to genomic breeding value without progeny testing, the sires or grandsires of candidates might not have phenotypic information and might not be in the reference population when the candidates are selected. The objective of this study was to investigate the decreasing trend of the reliability of genomic prediction given distant reference populations, using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and Bayesian variable selection models with or without including the quantitative trait locus (QTL) markers detected from sequencing data. The data used in this study consisted of 22,242 bulls genotyped using the 54K SNP array from EuroGenomics. Among them, 1,444 Danish bulls born from 2006 to 2010 were selected as test animals. Different reference populations with varying relationships to test animals were created according to pedigree-based relationships. The reference individuals having a relationship with one or more test animals higher than 0.4 (scenario ρ < 0.4), 0.2 (ρ < 0.2), or 0.1 (ρ < 0.1, where ρ = relationship coefficient) were removed from reference sets; these represented the distance between reference and test animals being 2 generations, 3 generations, and 4 generations, respectively. Imputed whole-genome sequencing data of bulls from Denmark were used to conduct a genome-wide association study (GWAS). A small number of significant variants (QTL markers) from the GWAS were added to the array data. To compare the effects of different models, the basic GBLUP model, a Bayesian selection variable model, a GBLUP model with 2 components of genetic effects, and a Bayesian model with pooled array data and QTL markers were used for estimating genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) of test animals. The reliability of genomic prediction decreased when the test animals were more generations away from the reference population. The reliability of genomic prediction was 0.461 for 1 generation away and 0.396 for 3 generations away, with the same number of individuals in the reference set, using a GBLUP model with chip markers only. The results showed that using the Bayesian method and QTL markers improved the reliability of genomic prediction in all scenarios of relationship between test and reference animals, in a range of 1.3% and 65.1% (4 generations away with only 841 individuals in the reference set). However, most gains were for predictions of milk yield and fat yield. There was little improvement for predictions of protein yield and mastitis, and no improvement for prediction of fertility, except for scenario ρ < 0.1, in which there was a large improvement for predictions of all traits. On the other hand, models including more than 10% polygenic effect decreased prediction reliability when the relationship between test and reference animals was distant.

Ma P ，Lund MS ，Aamand GP ，Su G ... -  《-》

Model comparison on genomic predictions using high-density markers for different groups of bulls in the Nordic Holstein population.

This study compared genomic predictions based on imputed high-density markers (~777,000) in the Nordic Holstein population using a genomic BLUP (GBLUP) model, 4 Bayesian exponential power models with different shape parameters (0.3, 0.5, 0.8, and 1.0) for the exponential power distribution, and a Bayesian mixture model (a mixture of 4 normal distributions). Direct genomic values (DGV) were estimated for milk yield, fat yield, protein yield, fertility, and mastitis, using deregressed proofs (DRP) as response variable. The validation animals were split into 4 groups according to their genetic relationship with the training population. Groupsmgs had both the sire and the maternal grandsire (MGS), Groupsire only had the sire, Groupmgs only had the MGS, and Groupnon had neither the sire nor the MGS in the training population. Reliability of DGV was measured as the squared correlation between DGV and DRP divided by the reliability of DRP for the bulls in validation data set. Unbiasedness of DGV was measured as the regression of DRP on DGV. The results indicated that DGV were more accurate and less biased for animals that were more related to the training population. In general, the Bayesian mixture model and the exponential power model with shape parameter of 0.30 led to higher reliability of DGV than did the other models. The differences between reliabilities of DGV from the Bayesian models and the GBLUP model were statistically significant for some traits. We observed a tendency that the superiority of the Bayesian models over the GBLUP model was more profound for the groups having weaker relationships with training population. Averaged over the 5 traits, the Bayesian mixture model improved the reliability of DGV by 2.0 percentage points for Groupsmgs, 2.7 percentage points for Groupsire, 3.3 percentage points for Groupmgs, and 4.3 percentage points for Groupnon compared with GBLUP. The results showed that a Bayesian model with intense shrinkage of the explanatory variable, such as the Bayesian mixture model and the Bayesian exponential power model with shape parameter of 0.30, can improve genomic predictions using high-density markers.

Gao H ，Su G ，Janss L ，Zhang Y ，Lund MS ... -  《-》

Comparison of genomic predictions using medium-density (∼54,000) and high-density (∼777,000) single nucleotide polymorphism marker panels in Nordic Holstein and Red Dairy Cattle populations.

This study investigated genomic prediction using medium-density (∼54,000; 54K) and high-density marker panels (∼777,000; 777K), based on data from Nordic Holstein and Red Dairy Cattle (RDC). The Holstein data comprised 4,539 progeny-tested bulls, and the RDC data 4,403 progeny-tested bulls. The data were divided into reference data and test data using October 1, 2001, as a cut-off date (birth date of the bulls). This resulted in about 25% genotyped bulls in the Holstein test data and 20% in the RDC test data. For each breed, 3 data sets of markers were used to predict breeding values: (1) 54K data set with missing genotypes, (2) 54K data set where missing genotypes were imputed, and (3) imputed high-density (HD) marker data set created by imputing the 54K data to the HD data based on 557 bulls genotyped using a 777K single nucleotide polymorphism chip in Holstein, and 706 bulls in RDC. Based on the 3 marker data sets, direct genomic breeding values (DGV) for protein, fertility, and udder health were predicted using a genomic BLUP model (GBLUP) and a Bayesian mixture model with 2 normal distributions. Reliability of DGV was measured as squared correlations between deregressed proofs (DRP) and DGV corrected for reliability of DRP. Unbiasedness was assessed by regression of DRP on DGV, based on the bulls in the test data sets. Averaged over the 3 traits, reliability of DGV based on the HD markers was 0.5% higher than that based on the 54K data in Holstein, and 1.0% higher than that in RDC. In addition, the HD markers led to an improvement of unbiasedness of DGV. The Bayesian mixture model led to 0.5% higher reliability than the GBLUP model in Holstein, but not in RDC. Imputing missing genotypes in the 54K marker data did not improve genomic predictions for most of the traits.

Su G ，Brøndum RF ，Ma P ，Guldbrandtsen B ，Aamand GP ，Lund MS ... -  《-》

Genomic prediction for Nordic Red Cattle using one-step and selection index blending.

This study investigated the accuracy of direct genomic breeding values (DGV) using a genomic BLUP model, genomic enhanced breeding values (GEBV) using a one-step blending approach, and GEBV using a selection index blending approach for 15 traits of Nordic Red Cattle. The data comprised 6,631 bulls of which 4,408 bulls were genotyped using Illumina Bovine SNP50 BeadChip (Illumina, San Diego, CA). To validate reliability of genomic predictions, about 20% of the youngest genotyped bulls were taken as test data set. Deregressed proofs (DRP) were used as response variables for genomic predictions. Reliabilities of genomic predictions in the validation analyses were measured as squared correlations between DRP and genomic predictions corrected for reliability of DRP, based on the bulls in the test data sets. A set of weighting (scaling) factors was used to construct the combined relationship matrix among genotyped and nongenotyped bulls for one-step blending, and to scale DGV and its expected reliability in the selection index blending. Weighting (scaling) factors had a small influence on reliabilities of GEBV, but a large influence on the variation of GEBV. Based on the validation analyses, averaged over the 15 traits, the reliability of DGV for bulls without daughter records was 11.0 percentage points higher than the reliability of conventional pedigree index. Further gain of 0.9 percentage points was achieved by combining information from conventional pedigree index using the selection index blending, and gain of 1.3 percentage points was achieved by combining information of genotyped and nongenotyped bulls simultaneously applying the one-step blending. These results indicate that genomic selection can greatly improve the accuracy of preselection for young bulls in Nordic Red population, and the one-step blending approach is a good alternative to predict GEBV in practical genetic evaluation program.

Su G ，Madsen P ，Nielsen US ，Mäntysaari EA ，Aamand GP ，Christensen OF ，Lund MS ... -  《-》