Exploring unknown parent groups and metafounders in single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction: Insights from a simulated cattle population

被引:0
|
作者
Himmelbauer, Judith [1 ,2 ]
Schwarzenbacher, Hermann [1 ]
Fuerst, Christian [1 ]
Fuerst-Waltl, Birgit [2 ]
机构
[1] ZuchtData EDV Dienstleistungen GmbH, A-1200 Vienna, Austria
[2] Univ Nat Resources & Life Sci, A-1180 Vienna, Austria
关键词
genetic evaluation; single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction; metafounder; unknown parent groups; GENETIC GROUPS; PEDIGREE; BIAS; COMPUTE; MODEL;
D O I
10.3168/jds.2024-24891
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
This study explores how the metafounder (MF) concept enhances genetic evaluations in dairy cattle populations using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP). By improving the consideration of relationships among founder populations, MF ensures accurate alignment of pedigree and genomic relationships. The research aims to propose a method for grouping MF based on genotypic information, assess different approaches for estimating the gamma matrix, and compare unknown parent groups (UPG) and MF methodologies across various scenarios, including those with low and high pedigree completeness based on a simulated dairy cattle population. In the scenario where unknown ancestors are rare, the effect of UPG or MF on breeding values is minimal but MF still performs slightly better compared with UPG. The scenario with lower genotyping rates and more unknown parents shows significant differences in evaluations with and without UPG and also compared with MF. The study shows that ssGBLUP evaluations where UPG are considered via Quaas-Pollak-transformation in the pedigree-based and genomic relationship matrix (UPG_ fullQP) results in double counting and subsequently in a pronounced bias and overdispersion. Another focus is on the estimation of the gamma matrix, emphasizing the importance of crossbred genotypes for accuracy. Challenges emerge in classifying animals into subpopulations and further into MF or UPG, but the method used in this study, which is based on genotypes, results in predictions which are comparable to those obtained using the true subpopulations for the assignment. Estimated validation results using the linear regression method confirm the superior performance of MF evaluations, although differences compared with true validations are smaller. Notably, UPG_fullQP's extreme bias is less evident in routine validation statistics.
引用
收藏
页码:8170 / 8192
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Invited review: Unknown-parent groups and metafounders in single-step genomic BLUP
    Masuda, Yutaka
    VanRaden, Paul M.
    Tsuruta, Shogo
    Lourenco, Daniela A. L.
    Misztal, Ignacy
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2022, 105 (02) : 923 - 939
  • [2] Genomic selection through single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction improves the accuracy of evaluation in Hanwoo cattle
    Park, Mi Na
    Alam, Mahboob
    Kim, Sidong
    Park, Byoungho
    Lee, Seung Hwan
    Lee, Sung Soo
    [J]. ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, 2020, 33 (10): : 1544 - 1557
  • [3] Detecting effective starting point of genomic selection by divergent trends from best linear unbiased prediction and single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction in pigs, beef cattle, and broilers
    Abdollahi-Arpanahi, Rostam
    Lourenco, Daniela
    Misztal, Ignacy
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2021, 99 (09)
  • [4] Genetic evaluations in cattle using the single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor
    Amaya Martinez, Alejandro
    Martinez Sarmiento, Rodrigo
    Ceron-Munoz, Mario
    [J]. REVISTA CORPOICA-CIENCIA Y TECNOLOGIA AGROPECUARIA, 2020, 21 (01):
  • [5] Genomic prediction using pooled data in a single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction framework
    Baller, Johnna L.
    Kachman, Stephen D.
    Kuehn, Larry A.
    Spangler, Matthew L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2020, 98 (06)
  • [6] Solving efficiently large single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction models
    Stranden, I.
    Matilainen, K.
    Aamand, G. P.
    Mantysaari, E. A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2017, 134 (03) : 264 - 274
  • [7] Bias of dairy sheep evaluations using BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP with metafounders and unknown parent groups.
    Macedo, F. L.
    Christensen, O. F.
    Astruc, J. M.
    Aguilar, I.
    Masuda, Y.
    Legarra, A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2020, 103 : 114 - 114
  • [8] Unknown-parent groups in single-step genomic evaluation
    Misztal, I.
    Vitezica, Z. G.
    Legarra, A.
    Aguilar, I.
    Swan, A. A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2013, 130 (04) : 252 - 258
  • [9] Correcting for base-population differences and unknown parent groups in single-step genomic predictions of Norwegian Red cattle
    Belay, Tesfaye K.
    Eikje, Leiv S.
    Gjuvsland, Arne B.
    Nordbo, Oyvind
    Tribout, Thierry
    Meuwissen, Theo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2022, 100 (09)
  • [10] The impact of truncating data on the predictive ability for single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction
    Howard, Jeremy T.
    Rathje, Tom A.
    Bruns, Caitlyn E.
    Wilson-Wells, Danielle F.
    Kachman, Stephen D.
    Spangler, Matthew L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL BREEDING AND GENETICS, 2018, 135 (04) : 251 - 262