Investigating the impact of non-additive genetic effects in the estimation of variance components and genomic predictions for heat tolerance and performance traits in crossbred and purebred pig populations

BACKGROUND

Non-additive genetic effects are often ignored in livestock genetic evaluations. However, fitting them in the models could improve the accuracy of genomic breeding values. Furthermore, non-additive genetic effects contribute to heterosis, which could be optimized through mating designs. Traits related to fitness and adaptation, such as heat tolerance, tend to be more influenced by non-additive genetic effects. In this context, the primary objectives of this study were to estimate variance components and assess the predictive performance of genomic prediction of breeding values based on alternative models and two independent datasets, including performance records from a purebred pig population and heat tolerance indicators recorded in crossbred lactating sows.

RESULTS

Including non-additive genetic effects when modelling performance traits in purebred pigs had no effect on the residual variance estimates for most of the traits, but lower additive genetic variances were observed, especially when additive-by-additive epistasis was included in the models. Furthermore, including non-additive genetic effects did not improve the prediction accuracy of genomic breeding values, but there was animal re-ranking across the models. For the heat tolerance indicators recorded in a crossbred population, most traits had small non-additive genetic variance with large standard error estimates. Nevertheless, panting score and hair density presented substantial additive-by-additive epistatic variance. Panting score had an epistatic variance estimate of 0.1379, which accounted for 82.22% of the total genetic variance. For hair density, the epistatic variance estimates ranged from 0.1745 to 0.1845, which represent 64.95-69.59% of the total genetic variance.

CONCLUSIONS

Including non-additive genetic effects in the models did not improve the accuracy of genomic breeding values for performance traits in purebred pigs, but there was substantial re-ranking of selection candidates depending on the model fitted. Except for panting score and hair density, low non-additive genetic variance estimates were observed for heat tolerance indicators in crossbred pigs.

Purebred and Crossbred Genomic Evaluation and Mate Allocation Strategies To Exploit Dominance in Pig Crossbreeding Schemes

We investigated the effectiveness of mate allocation strategies accounting for non-additive genetic effects to improve crossbred performance in a two-way crossbreeding scheme. We did this by computer simulation of 10 generations of evaluation and selection. QTL effects were simulated as correlated across purebreds and crossbreds, and (positive) heterosis was simulated as directional dominance. The purebred-crossbred correlation was 0.30 or 0.68 depending on the genetic variance component used. Dominance and additive marker effects were estimated simultaneously for purebreds and crossbreds by multiple trait genomic BLUP. Four scenarios that differ in the sources of information (only purebred data, or purebred and crossbred data) and mate allocation strategies (mating at random, minimizing expected future inbreeding, or maximizing the expected total genetic value of crossbred animals) were evaluated under different cases of genetic variance components. Selecting purebred animals for purebred performance yielded a response of 0.2 genetic standard deviations of the trait “crossbred performance” per generation, whereas selecting purebred animals for crossbred performance doubled the genetic response. Mate allocation strategy to maximize the expected total genetic value of crossbred descendants resulted in a slight increase (0.8%, 4% and 0.5% depending on the genetic variance components) of the crossbred performance. Purebred populations increased homozygosity, but the heterozygosity of the crossbreds remained constant. When purebred-crossbred genetic correlation is low, selecting purebred animals for crossbred performance using crossbred information is a more efficient strategy to exploit heterosis and increase performance at the crossbred commercial level, whereas mate allocation did not improve crossbred performance.