Prediction ability of an alternative multi-trait genomic evaluation for residual feed intake

被引:3
|
作者
Pravia, Maria Isabel [1 ,2 ]
Navajas, Elly Ana [1 ]
Aguilar, Ignacio [1 ]
Ravagnolo, Olga [1 ]
机构
[1] INIA Uruguay, Inst Nacl Invest Agr, Canelones, Uruguay
[2] INIA Brujas, Inst Nacl Invest Agr, Canelones, Uruguay
关键词
genomic prediction; multi-trait; validation strategies; GENETIC EVALUATION; BREEDING VALUES; VALIDATION; ACCURACIES; ANIMALS; CATTLE; BIAS;
D O I
10.1111/jbg.12775
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Selection for feed efficiency is the goal for many genetic breeding programs in beef cattle. Residual feed intake has been included in genetic evaluations to reduce feed intake without compromising performance traits as liveweight, body gain or carcass traits. However, measuring feed intake is expensive, and only a small percentage of selection candidates are phenotyped. Genomic selection has become a very important tool to achieve effective genetic progress in these traits. Another effective strategy has been the implementation of multi-trait prediction using easily recordable predictor traits on both reference animals and candidates without phenotypes, and this could be another inexpensive way to increase accuracy. The objective of this work was to analyse and compare the prediction ability of two alternative different approaches to predict GEBVs for RFI. The population of inference was Hereford bulls in Uruguay that were genotyped candidates for to selection. The first model was the conventional univariate model for RFI and the second model was a multi-trait model which included a predictor trait (weaning weight, WW), in addition to the traits used in the first one (dry matter intake, metabolic mid test weight, average daily gain and ultrasound back fat) (DMI, MWT, ADG, UBF, respectively). GEBVs from the multi-trait model were combined using selection index theory to derive RFI values. All analyses were performed using ssGBLUP procedure. The prediction ability of both models was tested using two validation strategies (30 different replicates of random groups of animals and validation across 9 different feed intake tests). The prediction quality was assessed by the following parameters: bias, dispersion, ratio of accuracies and the relative increase in accuracy by adding phenotypic information. All parameters showed that the univariate model outperforms the multi-trait model, regardless of the validation strategy considered. These results indicate that including WW as a proxy trait in a multi-trait analysis does not improve the prediction ability when all animals to be predicted are genotyped.
引用
收藏
页码:508 / 518
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Multi-Trait Genomic Prediction Models Enhance the Predictive Ability of Grain Trace Elements in Rice
    Muvunyi, Blaise Pascal
    Zou, Wenli
    Zhan, Junhui
    He, Sang
    Ye, Guoyou
    FRONTIERS IN GENETICS, 2022, 13
  • [2] A multi-trait Bayesian method for mapping QTL and genomic prediction
    Kathryn E. Kemper
    Philip J. Bowman
    Benjamin J. Hayes
    Peter M. Visscher
    Michael E. Goddard
    Genetics Selection Evolution, 50
  • [3] Comparative Study of Single-Trait and Multi-Trait Genomic Prediction Models
    Tang, Xi
    Xiao, Shijun
    Ding, Nengshui
    Zhang, Zhiyan
    Huang, Lusheng
    ANIMALS, 2024, 14 (20):
  • [4] A multi-trait Bayesian method for mapping QTL and genomic prediction
    Kemper, Kathryn E.
    Bowman, Philip J.
    Hayes, Benjamin J.
    Visscher, Peter M.
    Goddard, Michael E.
    GENETICS SELECTION EVOLUTION, 2018, 50
  • [5] Single and multi-trait genomic prediction for agronomic traits in Euterpe edulis
    Canal, Guilherme Bravim
    Valiati Barreto, Cynthia Aparecida
    Nogueira de Almeida, Francine Alves
    Zaidan, Iasmine Ramos
    do Couto, Diego Pereira
    Azevedo, Camila Ferreira
    Nascimento, Moyses
    da Silva Ferreira, Marcia Flores
    Ferreira, Adesio
    PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (04):
  • [6] Improving multi-trait genomic prediction by incorporating local genetic correlations
    Teng, Jun
    Zhai, Tingting
    Zhang, Xinyi
    Zhao, Changheng
    Wang, Wenwen
    Tang, Hui
    Ning, Chao
    Shang, Yingli
    Wang, Dan
    Zhang, Qin
    COMMUNICATIONS BIOLOGY, 2025, 8 (01)
  • [7] Pitfalls and Remedies for Cross Validation with Multi-trait Genomic Prediction Methods
    Runcie, Daniel
    Cheng, Hao
    G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS, 2019, 9 (11): : 3727 - 3741
  • [8] Mitigating the impact of selective phenotyping in training populations on the prediction ability by multi-trait pedigree and genomic selection models
    Michel, Sebastian
    Loeschenberger, Franziska
    Sparry, Ellen
    Ametz, Christian
    Buerstmayr, Hermann
    PLANT BREEDING, 2020, 139 (06) : 1067 - 1075
  • [9] Comparison of genomic prediction methods for residual feed intake in broilers
    He, Zhengxiao
    Li, Sen
    Li, Wei
    Ding, Jiqiang
    Zheng, Maiqing
    Li, Qinghe
    Fahey, Alan G.
    Wen, Jie
    Liu, Ranran
    Zhao, Guiping
    ANIMAL GENETICS, 2022, 53 (03) : 466 - 469
  • [10] Comparison of Single-Trait and Multi-Trait GBLUP Models for Genomic Prediction in Red Clover
    Osterman, Johanna
    Gutierrez, Lucia
    Ohlund, Linda
    Ortiz, Rodomiro
    Hammenhag, Cecilia
    Parsons, David
    Geleta, Mulatu
    AGRONOMY-BASEL, 2024, 14 (10):