Accounting for genetic architecture in single- and multipopulation genomic prediction using weights from genomewide association studies in pigs

Accounting for genetic architecture for body weight improves accuracy of predicting breeding values in a commercial line of broilers

BLUP (best linear unbiased prediction) is the standard for predicting breeding values, where different assumptions can be made on variance–covariance structure, which may influence predictive ability. Herein, we compare accuracy of prediction of four derived‐BLUP models: (a) a pedigree relationship matrix (PBLUP), (b) a genomic relationship matrix (GBLUP), (c) a weighted genomic relationship matrix (WGBLUP) and (d) a relationship matrix based on genomic features that consisted of only a subset of SNP selected on a priori information (GFBLUP). We phenotyped a commercial population of broilers for body weight (BW) in five successive weeks and genotyped them using a 50k SNP array. We compared predictive ability of univariate models using conservative cross‐validation method, where each full‐sib group was divided into two folds. Results from cross‐validation showed, with WGBLUP model, a gain in accuracy from 2% to 7% compared with GBLUP model. Splitting the additive genetic matrix into two matrices, based on significance level of SNP (G_f: estimated with only set of SNP selected on significance level, G_r: estimated with the remaining SNP), led to a gain in accuracy from 1% to 70%, depending on the proportion of SNP used to define G_f. Thus, information from GWAS in models improves predictive ability of breeding values for BW in broilers. Increasing the power of detection of SNP effects, by acquiring more data or improving methods for GWAS, will help improve predictive ability.

Applying an association weight matrix in weighted genomic prediction of boar taint compounds

Biological information regarding markers and gene association may be used to attribute different weights for single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in genome-wide selection. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the predictive ability and the bias of genomic prediction using models that allow SNP weighting in the genomic relationship matrix (G) building, with and without incorporating biological information to obtain the weights. Firstly, we performed a genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in data set containing single- (SL) or a multi-line (ML) pig population for androstenone, skatole and indole levels. Secondly, 1%, 2%, 5%, 10%, 30% and 50% of the markers explaining the highest proportions of the genetic variance for each trait were selected to build gene networks through the association weight matrix (AWM) approach. The number of edges in the network was computed and used to derive weights for G (AWM-WssGBLUP). The single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) and weighted ssGBLUP (WssGBLUP) were used as standard scenarios. All scenarios presented predictive abilities different from zero; however, the great overlap in their confidences interval suggests no differences among scenarios. Most of scenarios of based on AWM provide overestimations for skatole in both SL and ML populations. On the other hand, the skatole and indole prediction were no biased in the ssGBLUP (S1) in both SL and ML populations. Most of scenarios based on AWM provide no biased predictions for indole in both SL and ML populations. In summary, using biological information through AWM matrix and gene networks to derive weights for genomic prediction resulted in no increase in predictive ability for boar taint compounds. In addition, this approach increased the number of analyses steps. Thus, we can conclude that ssGBLUP is most appropriate for the analysis of boar taint compounds in comparison with the weighted strategies used in the present work.

Incorporating Genome-Wide Association Mapping Results Into Genomic Prediction Models for Grain Yield and Yield Stability in CIMMYT Spring Bread Wheat

Untangling the genetic architecture of grain yield (GY) and yield stability is an important determining factor to optimize genomics-assisted selection strategies in wheat. We conducted in-depth investigation on the above using a large set of advanced bread wheat lines (4,302), which were genotyped with genotyping-by-sequencing markers and phenotyped under contrasting (irrigated and stress) environments. Haplotypes-based genome-wide-association study (GWAS) identified 58 associations with GY and 15 with superiority index Pi (measure of stability). Sixteen associations with GY were "environment-specific" with two on chromosomes 3B and 6B with the large effects and 8 associations were consistent across environments and trials. For Pi, 8 associations were from chromosomes 4B and 7B, indicating 'hot spot' regions for stability. Epistatic interactions contributed to an additional 5-9% variation on average. We further explored whether integrating consistent and robust associations identified in GWAS as fixed effects in prediction models improves prediction accuracy. For GY, the model accounting for the haplotype-based GWAS loci as fixed effects led to up to 9-10% increase in prediction accuracy, whereas for Pi this approach did not provide any advantage. This is the first report of integrating genetic architecture of GY and yield stability into prediction models in wheat.

Genomic Prediction Using Multi-trait Weighted GBLUP Accounting for Heterogeneous Variances and Covariances Across the Genome

Implicit assumption of common (co)variance for all loci in multi-trait Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Prediction (GBLUP) results in a genomic relationship matrix (G) that is common to all traits. When this assumption is violated, Bayesian whole genome regression methods may be superior to GBLUP by accounting for unequal (co)variance for all loci or genome regions. This study aimed to develop a strategy to improve the accuracy of GBLUP for multi-trait genomic prediction, using (co)variance estimates of SNP effects from Bayesian whole genome regression methods. Five generations (G1-G5, test populations) of genotype data were available by simulations based on data of 2,200 Danish Holstein cows (G0, reference population). Two correlated traits with heritabilities of 0.1 or 0.4, and a genetic correlation of 0.45 were generated. First, SNP effects and breeding values were estimated using BayesAS method, assuming (co)variance was the same for SNPs within a genome region, and different between regions. Region size was set as one SNP, 100 SNPs, a whole chromosome or whole genome. Second, posterior (co)variances of SNP effects were used to weight SNPs in construction of G matrices. In general, region size of 100 SNPs led to highest prediction accuracies using BayesAS, and wGBLUP outperformed GBLUP at this region size. Our results suggest that when genetic architectures of traits favor Bayesian methods, the accuracy of multi-trait GBLUP can be as high as the Bayesian method if SNPs are weighted by the Bayesian posterior (co)variances.

Using markers with large effect in genetic and genomic predictions

The first attempts of applying marker-assisted selection (MAS) in animal breeding were not very successful because the identification of markers closely linked to QTL using low-density microsatellite panels was difficult. More recently, the use of high-density SNP panels in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have increased the power and precision of identifying markers linked to QTL, which offer new possibilities for MAS. However, when GWAS started to be performed, the focus of many breeders had already shifted from the use of MAS to the application of genomic selection (using all available markers without any preselection of markers linked to QTL). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the prediction accuracy of a MAS approach that accounts for GWAS findings in the prediction models by including the most significant SNP from GWAS as a fixed effect in the marker-assisted BLUP (MA-BLUP) and marker-assisted genomic BLUP (MA-GBLUP) prediction models. A second aim was to compare the prediction accuracies from the marker-assisted models with those obtained from a Bayesian variable selection (BVS) model. To compare the prediction accuracies of traditional BLUP, MA-BLUP, genomic BLUP (GBLUP), MA-GBLUP, and BVS, we applied these models to the trait "number of teats" in 4 distinct pig populations, for validation of the results. The most significant SNP in each population was located at approximately 103.50 Mb on chromosome 7. Applying MAS by accounting for the most significant SNP in the prediction models resulted in improved prediction accuracy for number of teats in all evaluated populations compared with BLUP and GBLUP. Using MA-BLUP instead of BLUP, the increase in prediction accuracy ranged from 0.021 to 0.124, whereas using MA-GBLUP instead of GBLUP, the increase in prediction accuracy ranged from 0.003 to 0.043. The BVS model resulted in similar or higher prediction accuracies than MA-GBLUP. For the trait number of teats, BLUP resulted in the lowest prediction accuracies whereas the highest were observed when applying MA-GBLUP or BVS. In the same data set, MA-BLUP can yield similar or superior accuracies compared with GBLUP. The superiority of MA-GBLUP over traditional GBLUP is more pronounced when training populations are smaller and when relationships between training and validation populations are smaller. Marker-assisted GBLUP did not outperform BVS but does have implementation advantages in large-scale evaluations.