Article (Scientific journals)
Performances of Adaptive MultiBLUP, Bayesian regressions, and weighted-GBLUP approaches for genomic predictions in Belgian Blue beef cattle.
Gualdron Duarte, Jose Luis; Gori, Ann-Stephan; Hubin, Xavier et al.
2020In BMC Genomics, 21 (1), p. 545
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
 

Files


Full Text
gualdron_BMCgenomics2020.pdf
Publisher postprint (3.8 MB)
Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to



Details



Keywords :
Beef cattle; Bovine genomics; Genome-wide association study; Genomic prediction; Genomic selection
Abstract :
[en] BACKGROUND: Genomic selection has been successfully implemented in many livestock and crop species. The genomic best linear unbiased predictor (GBLUP) approach, assigning equal variance to all SNP effects, is one of the reference methods. When large-effect variants contribute to complex traits, it has been shown that genomic prediction methods that assign a higher variance to subsets of SNP effects can achieve higher prediction accuracy. We herein compared the efficiency of several such approaches, including the Adaptive MultiBLUP (AM-BLUP) that uses local genomic relationship matrices (GRM) to automatically identify and weight genomic regions with large effects, to predict genetic merit in Belgian Blue beef cattle. RESULTS: We used a population of approximately 10,000 genotyped cows and their phenotypes for 14 traits, mostly related to muscular development and body dimensions. According to the trait, we found that 4 to 25% of the genetic variance could be associated with 2 to 12 genomic regions harbouring large-effect variants. Noteworthy, three previously identified recessive deleterious variants presented heterozygote advantage and were among the most significant SNPs for several traits. The AM-BLUP resulted in increased reliability of genomic predictions compared to GBLUP (+ 2%), but Bayesian methods proved more efficient (+ 3%). Overall, the reliability gains remained thus limited although higher gains were observed for skin thickness, a trait affected by two genomic regions having particularly large effects. Higher accuracies than those from the original AM-BLUP were achieved when applying the Bayesian Sparse Linear Mixed Model to pre-select groups of SNPs with large effects and subsequently use their estimated variance to build a weighted GRM. Finally, the single-step GBLUP performed best and could be further improved (+ 3% prediction accuracy) by using these weighted GRM. CONCLUSIONS: The AM-BLUP is an attractive method to automatically identify and weight genomic regions with large effects on complex traits. However, the method was less accurate than Bayesian methods. Overall, weighted methods achieved modest accuracy gains compared to GBLUP. Nevertheless, the computational efficiency of the AM-BLUP might be valuable at higher marker density, including with whole-genome sequencing data. Furthermore, weighted GRM are particularly useful to account for large variance loci in the single-step GBLUP.
Disciplines :
Genetics & genetic processes
Animal production & animal husbandry
Author, co-author :
Gualdron Duarte, Jose Luis ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Medical Genomics-Unit of Animal Genomics
Gori, Ann-Stephan
Hubin, Xavier
Lourenco, Daniela
Charlier, Carole  ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Medical Genomics-Unit of Animal Genomics
Misztal, Ignacy
Druet, Tom ;  Université de Liège - ULiège > Medical Genomics-Unit of Animal Genomics
Language :
English
Title :
Performances of Adaptive MultiBLUP, Bayesian regressions, and weighted-GBLUP approaches for genomic predictions in Belgian Blue beef cattle.
Publication date :
2020
Journal title :
BMC Genomics
eISSN :
1471-2164
Publisher :
BioMed Central, United Kingdom
Volume :
21
Issue :
1
Pages :
545
Peer reviewed :
Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi
Tags :
CÉCI : Consortium des Équipements de Calcul Intensif
Funders :
CÉCI - Consortium des Équipements de Calcul Intensif [BE]
F.R.S.-FNRS - Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique [BE]
Available on ORBi :
since 28 December 2020

Statistics


Number of views
85 (11 by ULiège)
Number of downloads
52 (11 by ULiège)

Scopus citations®
 
7
Scopus citations®
without self-citations
4
OpenCitations
 
6

Bibliography


Similar publications



Contact ORBi