Comparison of sequencing-based and array-based genotyping platforms for genomic prediction of maize hybrid performance

被引:9
|
作者
Yu, Guangning [1 ]
Cui, Yanru [2 ]
Jiao, Yuxin [1 ]
Zhou, Kai [1 ]
Wang, Xin [1 ]
Yang, Wenyan [1 ]
Xu, Yiyi [1 ]
Yang, Kun [1 ]
Zhang, Xuecai [3 ]
Li, Pengcheng [1 ]
Yang, Zefeng [1 ]
Xu, Yang [1 ]
Xu, Chenwu [1 ]
机构
[1] Yangzhou Univ, Coll Agr, Jiangsu Coinnovat Ctr Modern Prod Technol Grain Cr, Key Lab Plant Funct Genom,Minist Educ,Jiangsu Key, Yangzhou 225009, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] Hebei Agr Univ, State Key Lab North China Crop Improvement & Regul, Baoding 071001, Hebei, Peoples R China
[3] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr CIMMYT, Mexico City 06600, DF, Mexico
来源
CROP JOURNAL | 2023年 / 11卷 / 02期
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Genomic selection; Maize; GBS; SNP array; Marker density; POPULATIONS; ASSOCIATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.cj.2022.09.004
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Genomic selection (GS) is a powerful tool for improving genetic gain in maize breeding. However, its rou-tine application in large-scale breeding pipelines is limited by the high cost of genotyping platforms. Although sequencing-based and array-based genotyping platforms have been used for GS, few studies have compared prediction performance among platforms. In this study, we evaluated the predictabilities of four agronomic traits in 305 maize hybrids derived from 149 parental lines subjected to genotyping by sequencing (GBS), a 40K SNP array, and target sequence capture (TSC) using eight GS models. The GBS marker dataset yielded the highest predictabilities for all traits, followed by TSC and SNP array datasets. We investigated the effect of marker density and statistical models on predictability among genotyping platforms and found that 1K SNPs were sufficient to achieve comparable predictabilities to 10K and all SNPs, and BayesB, GBLUP, and RKHS performed well, while XGBoost performed poorly in most cases. We also selected significant SNP subsets using genome-wide association study (GWAS) analyses in three panels to predict hybrid performance. GWAS facilitated selecting effective SNP subsets for GS and thus reduced genotyping cost, but depended heavily on the GWAS panel. We conclude that there is still room for optimization of the existing SNP array, and using genotyping by target sequencing (GBTS) techniques to integrate a few functional markers identified by GWAS into the 1K SNP array holds great promise of being an effective strategy for developing desirable GS breeding arrays.(c) 2022 Crop Science Society of China and Institute of Crop Science, CAAS. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:490 / 498
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of sequencing-based and array-based genotyping platforms for genomic prediction of maize hybrid performance
    Guangning Yu
    Yanru Cui
    Yuxin Jiao
    Kai Zhou
    Xin Wang
    Wenyan Yang
    Yiyi Xu
    Kun Yang
    Xuecai Zhang
    Pengcheng Li
    Zefeng Yang
    Yang Xu
    Chenwu Xu
    The Crop Journal, 2023, 11 (02) : 490 - 498
  • [2] A comparison between genotyping-by-sequencing and array-based scoring of SNPs for genomic prediction accuracy in winter wheat
    Elbasyoni, Ibrahim S.
    Lorenz, A. J.
    Guttieri, M.
    Frels, K.
    Baenziger, P. S.
    Poland, J.
    Akhunov, E.
    PLANT SCIENCE, 2018, 270 : 123 - 130
  • [3] Integrative DNA copy number detection and genotyping from sequencing and array-based platforms
    Zhou, Zilu
    Wang, Weixin
    Wang, Li-San
    Zhang, Nancy Ruonan
    BIOINFORMATICS, 2018, 34 (14) : 2349 - 2355
  • [4] Comparison of array- and sequencing-based markers for genome-wide association mapping and genomic prediction in spring wheat
    Liu, Caiyun
    Sukumaran, Sivakumar
    Jarquin, Diego
    Crossa, Jose
    Dreisigacker, Susanne
    Sansaloni, Carolina
    Reynolds, Matthew
    CROP SCIENCE, 2020, 60 (01) : 211 - 225
  • [5] Genomic Prediction in Maize Breeding Populations with Genotyping-by-Sequencing
    Crossa, Jose
    Beyene, Yoseph
    Kassa, Semagn
    Perez, Paulino
    Hickey, John M.
    Chen, Charles
    de los Campos, Gustavo
    Burgueno, Juan
    Windhausen, Vanessa S.
    Buckler, Ed
    Jannink, Jean-Luc
    Lopez Cruz, Marco A.
    Babu, Raman
    G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS, 2013, 3 (11): : 1903 - 1926
  • [6] A comparison of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) platforms in the accurate characterization of cytogenetic alterations is multiple myeloma.
    Worley, H
    Cheung, KL
    Harrison, CJ
    Strefford, JC
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS, 2005, 42 : S70 - S70
  • [7] GENOMEPROFILE : Unveiling the genomic profile for livestock breeding through comprehensive SNP array-based genotyping
    Hulsegge, Ina
    Bouwman, Aniek C.
    Derks, Martijn F. L.
    ANIMAL GENETICS, 2024,
  • [8] zCall: a rare variant caller for array-based genotyping
    Goldstein, Jacqueline I.
    Crenshaw, Andrew
    Carey, Jason
    Grant, George B.
    Maguire, Jared
    Fromer, Menachem
    O'Dushlaine, Colm
    Moran, Jennifer L.
    Chambert, Kimberly
    Stevens, Christine
    Sklar, Pamela
    Hultman, Christina M.
    Purcell, Shaun
    McCarroll, Steven A.
    Sullivan, Patrick F.
    Daly, Mark J.
    Neale, Benjamin M.
    BIOINFORMATICS, 2012, 28 (19) : 2543 - 2545
  • [9] Array-based genomic resequencing of human leukemia
    Yamashita, Y.
    Yuan, J.
    Suetake, I.
    Suzuki, H.
    Ishikawa, Y.
    Choi, Y. L.
    Ueno, T.
    Soda, M.
    Hamada, T.
    Haruta, H.
    Takada, S.
    Miyazaki, Y.
    Kiyoi, H.
    Ito, E.
    Naoe, T.
    Tomonaga, M.
    Toyota, M.
    Tajima, S.
    Iwama, A.
    Mano, H.
    ONCOGENE, 2010, 29 (25) : 3723 - 3731
  • [10] Array-based genomic resequencing of human leukemia
    Y Yamashita
    J Yuan
    I Suetake
    H Suzuki
    Y Ishikawa
    Y L Choi
    T Ueno
    M Soda
    T Hamada
    H Haruta
    S Takada
    Y Miyazaki
    H Kiyoi
    E Ito
    T Naoe
    M Tomonaga
    M Toyota
    S Tajima
    A Iwama
    H Mano
    Oncogene, 2010, 29 : 3723 - 3731