Development of genomic predictions for Angus cattle in Brazil incorporating genotypes from related American sires.

Genomic prediction has become the new standard for genetic improvement programs, and currently, there is a desire to implement this technology for the evaluation of Angus cattle in Brazil. Thus, the main objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of evaluating young Brazilian Angus (BA) bulls and heifers for 12 routinely recorded traits using single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) with and without genotypes from American Angus (AA) sires. The second objective was to obtain estimates of effective population size (Ne) and linkage disequilibrium (LD) in the Brazilian Angus population. The dataset contained phenotypic information for up to 277,661 animals belonging to the Promebo breeding program, pedigree for 362,900, of which 1,386 were genotyped for 50k, 77k, and 150k single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panels. After imputation and quality control, 61,666 SNPs were available for the analyses. In addition, genotypes from 332 American Angus (AA) sires widely used in Brazil were retrieved from the AA Association database to be used for genomic predictions. Bivariate animal models were used to estimate variance components, traditional EBV, and genomic EBV (GEBV). Validation was carried out with the linear regression method (LR) using young-genotyped animals born between 2013 and 2015 without phenotypes in the reduced dataset and with records in the complete dataset. Validation animals were further split into progeny of BA and AA sires to evaluate if their progenies would benefit by including genotypes from AA sires. The Ne was 254 based on pedigree and 197 based on LD, and the average LD (±SD) and distance between adjacent single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) across all chromosomes were 0.27 (±0.27) and 40743.68 bp, respectively. Prediction accuracies with ssGBLUP outperformed BLUP for all traits, improving accuracies by, on average, 16% for BA young bulls and heifers. The GEBV prediction accuracies ranged from 0.37 (total maternal for weaning weight and tick count) to 0.54 (yearling precocity) across all traits, and dispersion (LR coefficients) fluctuated between 0.92 and 1.06. Inclusion of genotyped sires from the AA improved GEBV accuracies by 2%, on average, compared to using only the BA reference population. Our study indicated that genomic information could help us to improve GEBV accuracies and hence genetic progress in the Brazilian Angus population. The inclusion of genotypes from American Angus sires heavily used in Brazil just marginally increased the GEBV accuracies for selection candidates.

Campos GS ，Cardoso FF ，Gomes CCG ，Domingues R ，de Almeida Regitano LC ，de Sena Oliveira MC ，de Oliveira HN ，Carvalheiro R ，Albuquerque LG ，Miller S ，Misztal I ，Lourenco D ... -  《-》

Changes in genomic predictions when new information is added.

The stability of genomic evaluations depends on the amount of data and population parameters. When the dataset is large enough to estimate the value of nearly all independent chromosome segments (~10K in American Angus cattle), the accuracy and persistency of breeding values will be high. The objective of this study was to investigate changes in estimated breeding values (EBV) and genomic EBV (GEBV) across monthly evaluations for 1 yr in a large genotyped population of beef cattle. The American Angus data used included 8.2 million records for birth weight, 8.9 for weaning weight, and 4.4 for postweaning gain. A total of 10.1 million animals born until December 2017 had pedigree information, and 484,074 were genotyped. A truncated dataset included animals born until December 2016. To mimic a scenario with monthly evaluations, 2017 data were added 1 mo at a time to estimate EBV using best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) and GEBV using single-step genomic BLUP with the algorithm for proven and young (APY) with core group fixed for 1 yr or updated monthly. Predictions from monthly evaluations in 2017 were contrasted with the predictions of the evaluation in December 2016 or the previous month for all genotyped animals born until December 2016 with or without their own phenotypes or progeny phenotypes. Changes in EBV and GEBV were similar across traits, and only results for weaning weight are presented. Correlations between evaluations from December 2016 and the 12 consecutive evaluations were ≥0.97 for EBV and ≥0.99 for GEBV. Average absolute changes for EBV were about two times smaller than for GEBV, except for animals with new progeny phenotypes (≤0.12 and ≤0.11 additive genetic SD [SDa] for EBV and GEBV). The maximum absolute changes for EBV (≤2.95 SDa) were greater than for GEBV (≤1.59 SDa). The average(maximum) absolute GEBV changes for young animals from December 2016 to January and December 2017 ranged from 0.05(0.25) to 0.10(0.53) SDa. Corresponding ranges for animals with new progeny phenotypes were from 0.05(0.88) to 0.11(1.59) SDa for GEBV changes. The average absolute change in EBV(GEBV) from December 2016 to December 2017 for sires with ≤50 progeny phenotypes was 0.26(0.14) and for sires with >50 progeny phenotypes was 0.25(0.16) SDa. Updating the core group in APY without adding data created an average absolute change of 0.07 SDa in GEBV. Genomic evaluations in large genotyped populations are as stable and persistent as the traditional genetic evaluations, with less extreme changes.

Hidalgo J ，Lourenco D ，Tsuruta S ，Masuda Y ，Miller S ，Bermann M ，Garcia ALS ，Misztal I ... -  《-》

Comparing algorithms to approximate accuracies for single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor.

The exact accuracy of estimated breeding values can be calculated based on the prediction error variances obtained from the diagonal of the inverse of the left-hand side (LHS) of the mixed model equations (MME). However, inverting the LHS is not computationally feasible for large datasets, especially if genomic information is available. Thus, different algorithms have been proposed to approximate accuracies. This study aimed to: 1) compare the approximated accuracies from 2 algorithms implemented in the BLUPF90 suite of programs, 2) compare the approximated accuracies from the 2 algorithms against the exact accuracy based on the inversion of the LHS of MME, and 3) evaluate the impact of adding genotyped animals with and without phenotypes on the exact and approximated accuracies. Algorithm 1 approximates accuracies based on the diagonal of the genomic relationship matrix (G). In turn, algorithm 2 combines accuracies with and without genomic information through effective record contributions. The data were provided by the American Angus Association and included 3 datasets of growth, carcass, and marbling traits. The genotype file contained 1,235,930 animals, and the pedigree file contained 12,492,581 animals. For the genomic evaluation, a multi-trait model was applied to the datasets. To ensure the feasibility of inverting the LHS of the MME, a subset of data under single-trait models was used to compare approximated and exact accuracies. The correlations between exact and approximated accuracies from algorithms 1 and 2 of genotyped animals ranged from 0.87 to 0.90 and 0.98 to 0.99, respectively. The intercept and slope of the regression of exact on approximated accuracies from algorithm 2 ranged from 0.00 to 0.01 and 0.82 to 0.87, respectively. However, the intercept and the slope for algorithm 1 ranged from -0.10 to 0.05 and 0.98 to 1.10, respectively. In more than 80% of the traits, algorithm 2 exhibited a smaller mean square error than algorithm 1. The correlation between the approximated accuracies obtained from algorithms 1 and 2 ranged from 0.56 to 0.74, 0.38 to 0.71, and 0.71 to 0.97 in the groups of genotyped animals, genotyped animals without phenotype, and proven genotyped sires, respectively. The approximated accuracy from algorithm 2 showed a closer behavior to the exact accuracy when including genotyped animals in the analysis. According to the results, algorithm 2 is recommended for genetic evaluations since it proved more precise.

Ramos P ，Garcia A ，Retallik K ，Bermann M ，Tsuruta S ，Misztal I ，Veroneze R ，Lourenco D ... -  《-》

Genomic prediction ability for beef fatty acid profile in Nelore cattle using different pseudo-phenotypes.

The aim of the present study was to compare the predictive ability of SNP-BLUP model using different pseudo-phenotypes such as phenotype adjusted for fixed effects, estimated breeding value, and genomic estimated breeding value, using simulated and real data for beef FA profile of Nelore cattle finished in feedlot. A pedigree with phenotypes and genotypes of 10,000 animals were simulated, considering 50% of multiple sires in the pedigree. Regarding to phenotypes, two traits were simulated, one with high heritability (0.58), another with low heritability (0.13). Ten replicates were performed for each trait and results were averaged among replicates. A historical population was created from generation zero to 2020, with a constant size of 2000 animals (from generation zero to 1000) to produce different levels of linkage disequilibrium (LD). Therefore, there was a gradual reduction in the number of animals (from 2000 to 600), producing a "bottleneck effect" and consequently, genetic drift and LD starting in the generation 1001 to 2020. A total of 335,000 markers (with MAF greater or equal to 0.02) and 1000 QTL were randomly selected from the last generation of the historical population to generate genotypic data for the test population. The phenotypes were computed as the sum of the QTL effects and an error term sampled from a normal distribution with zero mean and variance equal to 0.88. For simulated data, 4000 animals of the generations 7, 8, and 9 (with genotype and phenotype) were used as training population, and 1000 animals of the last generation (10) were used as validation population. A total of 937 Nelore bulls with phenotype for fatty acid profiles (Sum of saturated, monounsaturated, omega 3, omega 6, ratio of polyunsaturated and saturated and polyunsaturated fatty acid profile) were genotyped using the Illumina BovineHD BeadChip (Illumina, San Diego, CA) with 777,962 SNP. To compare the accuracy and bias of direct genomic value (DGV) for different pseudo-phenotypes, the correlation between true breeding value (TBV) or DGV with pseudo-phenotypes and linear regression coefficient of the pseudo-phenotypes on TBV for simulated data or DGV for real data, respectively. For simulated data, the correlations between DGV and TBV for high heritability traits were higher than obtained with low heritability traits. For simulated and real data, the prediction ability was higher for GEBV than for Yc and EBV. For simulated data, the regression coefficient estimates (b), were on average lower than 1 for high and low heritability traits, being inflated. The results were more biased for Yc and EBV than for GEBV. For real data, the GEBV displayed less biased results compared to Yc and EBV for SFA, MUFA, n-3, n-6, and PUFA/SFA. Despite the less biased results for PUFA using the EBV as pseudo-phenotype, the b estimates obtained for the different pseudo-phenotypes (Yc, EBV and GEBV) were very close. Genomic information can assist in improving beef fatty acid profile in Zebu cattle, since the use of genomic information yielded genomic values for fatty acid profile with accuracies ranging from low to moderate. Considering both simulated and real data, the ssGBLUP model is an appropriate alternative to obtain more reliable and less biased GEBVs as pseudo-phenotype in situations of missing pedigree, due to high proportion of multiple sires, being more adequate than EBV and Yc to predict direct genomic value for beef fatty acid profile.

Chiaia HLJ ，Peripolli E ，de Oliveira Silva RM ，Feitosa FLB ，de Lemos MVA ，Berton MP ，Olivieri BF ，Espigolan R ，Tonussi RL ，Gordo DGM ，de Albuquerque LG ，de Oliveira HN ，Ferrinho AM ，Mueller LF ，Kluska S ，Tonhati H ，Pereira ASC ，Aguilar I ，Baldi F ... -  《-》

Improving the accuracy of genomic evaluation for linear body measurement traits using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction in Hanwoo beef cattle.

Recently, there has been a growing interest in the genetic improvement of body measurement traits in farm animals. They are widely used as predictors of performance, longevity, and production traits, and it is worthwhile to investigate the prediction accuracies of genomic selection for these traits. In genomic prediction, the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) method allows the inclusion of information from genotyped and non-genotyped relatives in the analysis. Hence, we aimed to compare the prediction accuracy obtained from a pedigree-based BLUP only on genotyped animals (PBLUP-G), a traditional pedigree-based BLUP (PBLUP), a genomic BLUP (GBLUP), and a single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) method for the following 10 body measurement traits at yearling age of Hanwoo cattle: body height (BH), body length (BL), chest depth (CD), chest girth (CG), chest width (CW), hip height (HH), hip width (HW), rump length (RL), rump width (RW), and thurl width (TW). The data set comprised 13,067 phenotypic records for body measurement traits and 1523 genotyped animals with 34,460 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. The accuracy for each trait and model was estimated only for genotyped animals using five-fold cross-validations. The accuracies ranged from 0.02 to 0.19, 0.22 to 0.42, 0.21 to 0.44, and from 0.36 to 0.55 as assessed using the PBLUP-G, PBLUP, GBLUP, and ssGBLUP methods, respectively. The average predictive accuracies across traits were 0.13 for PBLUP-G, 0.34 for PBLUP, 0.33 for GBLUP, and 0.45 for ssGBLUP methods. Our results demonstrated that averaged across all traits, ssGBLUP outperformed PBLUP and GBLUP by 33 and 43%, respectively, in terms of prediction accuracy. Moreover, the least root of mean square error was obtained by ssGBLUP method. Our findings suggest that considering the ssGBLUP model may be a promising way to ensure acceptable accuracy of predictions for body measurement traits, especially for improving the prediction accuracy of selection candidates in ongoing Hanwoo breeding programs.

Naserkheil M ，Lee DH ，Mehrban H 《BMC GENETICS》