Comparison of regression tree-based methods in genomic selection

被引:3
|
作者
Ashoori-Banaei, Sahar [1 ]
Ghafouri-Kesbi, Farhad [1 ]
Ahmadi, Ahmad [1 ]
机构
[1] Bu Ali Sina Univ, Fac Agr, Dept Anim Sci, Hamadan 6517838695, Hamadan, Iran
关键词
genomic selection; heritability; quantitative trait loci; single-nucleotide polymorphism; PREDICTION; TRAITS; ACCURACY; CATTLE;
D O I
10.1007/s12041-021-01334-x
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
The aim of this study was to compare the predictive performance of tree-based methods including regression tree (RT), random forest (RF) and Boosting (BT) in genomic selection. To do this, a genome comprised of five chromosomes was simulated for 1000 individuals on which 5000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms were evenly distributed. Comparison of methods was made in different scenarios of genetic architecture (number of QTL and distribution of QTL effects) and heritability level (0.1, 0.3 and 0.5). Computing time and memory requirement of the studied methods were also measured. In all the scenarios studied, the RT had the lowest accuracy, one-half to one-third of that was observed for RF and Boosting. Therefore, while RT was most efficient user of time and memory, because of its low accuracy, it was not recommended for genomic selection. Comparing RF and Boosting, at low levels of heritability (0.1 and 0.3), the prediction accuracy of RF was significantly higher than Boosting, but at heritability of 0.5, their accuracy was almost equal. In addition, RF was significantly superior to Boosting regarding computing time and memory requirement. While, heritability had a significant impact on the accuracy of prediction, the effect of number of QTL and distribution of QTL effects were not very dramatic. According to the overall performance of the studied methods, RF is recommended for genomic selection.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of regression tree-based methods in genomic selection
    Sahar Ashoori-Banaei
    Farhad Ghafouri-Kesbi
    Ahmad Ahmadi
    [J]. Journal of Genetics, 2021, 100
  • [2] Comparison of tree-based ensemble models for regression
    Park, Sangho
    Kim, Chanmin
    [J]. COMMUNICATIONS FOR STATISTICAL APPLICATIONS AND METHODS, 2022, 29 (05) : 561 - 590
  • [3] Comparison of Tree-Based Methods for Multi-target Regression on Data Streams
    Osojnik, Aljaz
    Panov, Pance
    Dzeroski, Saso
    [J]. NEW FRONTIERS IN MINING COMPLEX PATTERNS, 2016, 9607 : 17 - 31
  • [4] Variable Selection Issues in Tree-Based Regression Models
    Qin, Xiao
    Han, Junhee
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2008, National Research Council (2061) : 30 - 38
  • [5] Tree-based methods for online multi-target regression
    Osojnik, Aljaz
    Panov, Pance
    Dzeroski, Saso
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2018, 50 (02) : 315 - 339
  • [6] Tree-based methods for online multi-target regression
    Aljaž Osojnik
    Panče Panov
    Sašo Džeroski
    [J]. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 2018, 50 : 315 - 339
  • [7] Tree-based classification and regression Part 3: Tree-based procedures
    Gunter, B
    [J]. QUALITY PROGRESS, 1998, 31 (02) : 121 - 123
  • [8] Tree-based ensemble methods for predicting PV power generation and their comparison with support vector regression
    Ahmad, Muhammad Waseem
    Mourshed, Monjur
    Rezgui, Yacine
    [J]. ENERGY, 2018, 164 : 465 - 474
  • [9] Regression tree-based active learning
    Ashna Jose
    João Paulo Almeida de Mendonça
    Emilie Devijver
    Noël Jakse
    Valérie Monbet
    Roberta Poloni
    [J]. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2024, 38 : 420 - 460
  • [10] Regression tree-based active learning
    Jose, Ashna
    de Mendonca, Joao Paulo Almeida
    Devijver, Emilie
    Jakse, Noel
    Monbet, Valerie
    Poloni, Roberta
    [J]. DATA MINING AND KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY, 2024, 38 (02) : 420 - 460