Genomic best linear unbiased prediction method including imprinting effects for genomic evaluation

Maternal effects and its importance in the genetic evaluations of preweaning live weight traits of beef cattle. A review

Maternal effects in cattle genetics are defined as the causal influence of the phenotype or maternal genotype on the offspring's phenotype by effects occurring when the genetic and environmental characteristics of the mother influence the phenotype of the offspring beyond the direct inheritance of genes. Its relevance has been strongly described in genetic models focused on the genetic improvement of preweaning traits in cow-calf beef cattle production systems. Here, basic concepts and the importance of maternal effects when using linear and animal model procedures for genetic evaluations of growth and live-weight traits in beef cattle are reviewed and discussed. A brief history of estimation methods from classical studies to recent studies used for the development of animal models for studying maternal effects is also provided. Some important biometric concepts for maternal effect estimation are described, and the antagonism between direct genetic effects and maternal effects, its biological basis, and sources of error in the estimation of direct genetic and maternal covariance are discussed. Finally, some genomic perspectives are presented.

Genomic dissection of additive and non-additive genetic effects and genomic prediction in an open-pollinated family test of Japanese larch

Genomic dissection of genetic effects on desirable traits and the subsequent use of genomic selection hold great promise for accelerating the rate of genetic improvement of forest tree species. In this study, a total of 661 offspring trees from 66 open-pollinated families of Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi (Lam.) Carrière) were sampled at a test site. The contributions of additive and non-additive effects (dominance, imprinting and epistasis) were evaluated for nine valuable traits related to growth, wood physical and chemical properties, and competitive ability using three pedigree-based and four Genomics-based Best Linear Unbiased Predictions (GBLUP) models and used to determine the genetic model. The predictive ability (PA) of two genomic prediction methods, GBLUP and Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces (RKHS), was compared. The traits could be classified into two types based on different quantitative genetic architectures: for type I, including wood chemical properties and Pilodyn penetration, additive effect is the main source of variation (38.20-67.46%); for type II, including growth, competitive ability and acoustic velocity, epistasis plays a significant role (50.76-91.26%). Dominance and imprinting showed low to moderate contributions (< 36.26%). GBLUP was more suitable for traits of type I (PAs = 0.37-0.39 vs. 0.14-0.25), and RKHS was more suitable for traits of type II (PAs = 0.23-0.37 vs. 0.07-0.23). Non-additive effects make no meaningful contribution to the enhancement of PA of GBLUP method for all traits. These findings enhance our current understanding of the architecture of quantitative traits and lay the foundation for the development of genomic selection strategies in Japanese larch.

A Bayesian Multivariate Gametic Model in a Reciprocal Cross with Genomic Information: An Example with Two Iberian Varieties

INGA FOOD, S.A. initiated a crossbreeding program between two Iberian pig varieties, Retinto (R) and Entrepelado (E), with the goal of producing a hybrid sow (F1). Several studies have been conducted to evaluate its productive performance, and these studies have revealed differences in litter size between the two reciprocal crosses, suggesting the presence of genomic imprinting effects. To further investigate these effects, this study introduces a multivariate gametic model designed to estimate gametic correlations between paternal and maternal effects originating from both genetic backgrounds involved in the reciprocal crosses. The dataset consisted of 1258 records (the total number born-TNB and the number born alive-NBA) from 203 crossbred dams for the Entrepelado (sire) × Retinto (dam) cross and 700 records from 125 crossbred dams for the Retinto (sire) × Entrepelado (dam) cross. All animals were genotyped using the GeneSeek^® GPP Porcine 70 K HDchip (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). The results indicated that the posterior distribution of the gametic correlation between paternal and maternal effects was distinctly different between the two populations. Specifically, in the Retinto population, the gametic correlation showed a positive skew with posterior probabilities of 0.78 for the TNB and 0.80 for the NBA. On the other hand, the Entrepelado population showed a posterior probability of a positive gametic correlation between paternal and maternal effects of approximately 0.50. The differences in the shape of the posterior distribution of the gametic correlations between paternal and maternal effects observed in the two varieties may account for the distinct performance outcomes observed in the reciprocal crosses.

Detection of Genomic Imprinting for Carcass Traits in Cattle Using Imputed High-Density Genotype Data

Genomic imprinting is an epigenetic phenomenon defined as the silencing of an allele, at least partially, at a given locus based on the sex of the transmitting parent. The objective of the present study was to detect the presence of SNP-phenotype imprinting associations for carcass weight (CW), carcass conformation (CC) and carcass fat (CF) in cattle. The data used comprised carcass data, along with imputed, high-density genotype data on 618,837 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from 23,687 cattle; all animal genotypes were phased with respect to parent of origin. Based on the phased genotypes and a series of single-locus linear models, 24, 339, and 316 SNPs demonstrated imprinting associations with CW, CC, and CF, respectively. Regardless of the trait in question, no known imprinted gene was located within 0.5 Mb of the SNPs demonstrating imprinting associations in the present study. Since all imprinting associations detected herein were at novel loci, further investigation of these regions may be warranted. Nonetheless, knowledge of these associations might be useful for improving the accuracy of genomic evaluations for these traits, as well as mate allocations systems to exploit the effects of genomic imprinting.

Genomic Prediction Methods Accounting for Nonadditive Genetic Effects

The use of genomic information for prediction of future phenotypes or breeding values for the candidates to selection has become a standard over the last decade. However, most procedures for genomic prediction only consider the additive (or substitution) effects associated with polymorphic markers. Nevertheless, the implementation of models that consider nonadditive genetic variation may be interesting because they (1) may increase the ability of prediction, (2) can be used to define mate allocation procedures in plant and animal breeding schemes, and (3) can be used to benefit from nonadditive genetic variation in crossbreeding or purebred breeding schemes. This study reviews the available methods for incorporating nonadditive effects into genomic prediction procedures and their potential applications in predicting future phenotypic performance, mate allocation, and crossbred and purebred selection. Finally, a brief outline of some future research lines is also proposed.

Generalized gametic relationships for flexible analyses of parent-of-origin effects

A class of epigenetic inheritance patterns known as genomic imprinting allows alleles to influence the phenotype in a parent-of-origin-specific manner. Various pedigree-based parent-of-origin analyses of quantitative traits have attempted to determine the share of genetic variance that is attributable to imprinted loci. In general, these methods require four random gametic effects per pedigree member to account for all possible types of imprinting in a mixed model. As a result, the system of equations may become excessively large to solve using all available data. If only the offspring have records, which is frequently the case for complex pedigrees, only two averaged gametic effects (transmitting abilities) per parent are required (reduced model). However, the parents may have records in some cases. Therefore, in this study, we explain how employing single gametic effects solely for informative individuals (i.e., phenotyped individuals), and only average gametic effects otherwise, significantly reduces the complexity compared with classical gametic models. A generalized gametic relationship matrix is the covariance of this mixture of effects. The matrix can also make the reduced model much more flexible by including observations from parents. Worked examples are present to illustrate the theory and a realistic body mass data set in mice is used to demonstrate its utility. We show how to set up the inverse of the generalized gametic relationship matrix directly from a pedigree. An open-source program is used to implement the rules. The application of the same principles to phased marker data leads to a genomic version of the generalized gametic relationships.

Review: optimizing genomic selection for crossbred performance by model improvement and data collection

Breeding programs aiming to improve the performance of crossbreds may benefit from genomic prediction of crossbred (CB) performance for purebred (PB) selection candidates. In this review, we compared genomic prediction strategies that differed in 1) the genomic prediction model used or 2) the data used in the reference population. We found 27 unique studies, two of which used deterministic simulation, 11 used stochastic simulation, and 14 real data. Differences in accuracy and response to selection between strategies depended on i) the value of the purebred crossbred genetic correlation (rpc), ii) the genetic distance between the parental lines, iii) the size of PB and CB reference populations, and iv) the relatedness of these reference populations to the selection candidates. In studies where a PB reference population was used, the use of a dominance model yielded accuracies that were equal to or higher than those of additive models. When rpc was lower than ~0.8, and was caused mainly by G × E, it was beneficial to create a reference population of PB animals that are tested in a CB environment. In general, the benefit of collecting CB information increased with decreasing rpc. For a given rpc, the benefit of collecting CB information increased with increasing size of the reference populations. Collecting CB information was not beneficial when rpc was higher than ~0.9, especially when the reference populations were small. Collecting only phenotypes of CB animals may slightly improve accuracy and response to selection, but requires that the pedigree is known. It is, therefore, advisable to genotype these CB animals as well. Finally, considering the breed-origin of alleles allows for modeling breed-specific effects in the CB, but this did not always lead to higher accuracies. Our review shows that the differences in accuracy and response to selection between strategies depend on several factors. One of the most important factors is rpc, and we, therefore, recommend to obtain accurate estimates of rpc of all breeding goal traits. Furthermore, knowledge about the importance of components of rpc (i.e., dominance, epistasis, and G × E) can help breeders to decide which model to use, and whether to collect data on animals in a CB environment. Future research should focus on the development of a tool that predicts accuracy and response to selection from scenario specific parameters.

A Review of Genomic Models for the Analysis of Livestock Crossbred Data

Livestock breeding has shifted during the past decade toward genomic selection. For the estimation of breeding values in purebred breeding schemes, genomic best linear unbiased prediction has become the method of choice. Systematic crossbreeding with the aim to utilize heterosis and breed complementary effects is widely used in livestock breeding, especially in pig and poultry breeding. The goal is to improve the performance of the crossbred animals. Due to genotype-by-environment interactions, imperfect linkage disequilibrium, and the existence of dominance and imprinting, purebred and crossbred performances are not perfectly correlated. Hence, more complex genomic models are required for crossbred populations. This study reviews and compares such models. Compared to purebred genomic models, the reviewed models were of much higher complexity due to the inclusion of dominance effects, breed-specific effects, imprinting effects, and the joint evaluation of purebred and crossbred performance data. With the model assessment work conducted until now, it is not possible to come to a clear recommendation as to which existing method is most suitable for a specific breeding program and a specific genetic trait architecture. Since it is expected that a superior method includes all the different genetic effects in a single model, a dominance model with imprinting and breed-specific SNP effects is proposed. Further progress could be made by assuming realistic covariance structures between the genetic effects of the different breeding lines, and by using larger marker panels and mixture distributions for the SNP effects.

Non-additive Effects in Genomic Selection

In the last decade, genomic selection has become a standard in the genetic evaluation of livestock populations. However, most procedures for the implementation of genomic selection only consider the additive effects associated with SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism) markers used to calculate the prediction of the breeding values of candidates for selection. Nevertheless, the availability of estimates of non-additive effects is of interest because: (i) they contribute to an increase in the accuracy of the prediction of breeding values and the genetic response; (ii) they allow the definition of mate allocation procedures between candidates for selection; and (iii) they can be used to enhance non-additive genetic variation through the definition of appropriate crossbreeding or purebred breeding schemes. This study presents a review of methods for the incorporation of non-additive genetic effects into genomic selection procedures and their potential applications in the prediction of future performance, mate allocation, crossbreeding, and purebred selection. The work concludes with a brief outline of some ideas for future lines of that may help the standard inclusion of non-additive effects in genomic selection.

Partitioning Phenotypic Variance Due to Parent-of-Origin Effects Using Genomic Relatedness Matrices

We propose a new method, G-REMLadp, to estimate the phenotypic variance explained by parent-of-origin effects (POEs) across the genome. Our method uses restricted maximum likelihood analysis of genome-wide genetic relatedness matrices based on individuals' phased genotypes. Genome-wide SNP data from parent child duos or trios is required to obtain relatedness matrices indexing the parental origin of offspring alleles, as well as offspring phenotype data to partition the trait variation into variance components. To calibrate the power of G-REMLadp to detect non-null POEs when they are present, we provide an analytic approximation derived from Haseman-Elston regression. We also used simulated data to quantify the power and Type I Error rates of G-REMLadp, as well as the sensitivity of its variance component estimates to violations of underlying assumptions. We subsequently applied G-REMLadp to 36 phenotypes in a sample of individuals from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). We found that the method does not seem to be inherently biased in estimating variance due to POEs, and that substantial correlation between parental genotypes is necessary to generate biased estimates. Our empirical results, power calculations and simulations indicate that sample sizes over 10000 unrelated parent-offspring duos will be necessary to detect POEs explaining < 10% of the variance with moderate power. We conclude that POEs tagged by our genetic relationship matrices are unlikely to explain large proportions of the phenotypic variance (i.e. > 15%) for the 36 traits that we have examined.

Genomic selection for crossbred performance accounting for breed-specific effects

Background

Breed-specific effects are observed when the same allele of a given genetic marker has a different effect depending on its breed origin, which results in different allele substitution effects across breeds. In such a case, single-breed breeding values may not be the most accurate predictors of crossbred performance. Our aim was to estimate the contribution of alleles from each parental breed to the genetic variance of traits that are measured in crossbred offspring, and to compare the prediction accuracies of estimated direct genomic values (DGV) from a traditional genomic selection model (GS) that are trained on purebred or crossbred data, with accuracies of DGV from a model that accounts for breed-specific effects (BS), trained on purebred or crossbred data. The final dataset was composed of 924 Large White, 924 Landrace and 924 two-way cross (F1) genotyped and phenotyped animals. The traits evaluated were litter size (LS) and gestation length (GL) in pigs.

Results

The genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performance was higher than 0.88 for both LS and GL. For both traits, the additive genetic variance was larger for alleles inherited from the Large White breed compared to alleles inherited from the Landrace breed (0.74 and 0.56 for LS, and 0.42 and 0.40 for GL, respectively). The highest prediction accuracies of crossbred performance were obtained when training was done on crossbred data. For LS, prediction accuracies were the same for GS and BS DGV (0.23), while for GL, prediction accuracy for BS DGV was similar to the accuracy of GS DGV (0.53 and 0.52, respectively).

Conclusions

In this study, training on crossbred data resulted in higher prediction accuracy than training on purebred data and evidence of breed-specific effects for LS and GL was demonstrated. However, when training was done on crossbred data, both GS and BS models resulted in similar prediction accuracies. In future studies, traits with a lower genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performance should be included to further assess the value of the BS model in genomic predictions.

Dissection of additive, dominance, and imprinting effects for production and reproduction traits in Holstein cattle

BACKGROUND

Although genome-wide association and genomic selection studies have primarily focused on additive effects, dominance and imprinting effects play an important role in mammalian biology and development. The degree to which these non-additive genetic effects contribute to phenotypic variation and whether QTL acting in a non-additive manner can be detected in genetic association studies remain controversial.

RESULTS

To empirically answer these questions, we analyzed a large cattle dataset that consisted of 42,701 genotyped Holstein cows with genotyped parents and phenotypic records for eight production and reproduction traits. SNP genotypes were phased in pedigree to determine the parent-of-origin of alleles, and a three-component GREML was applied to obtain variance decomposition for additive, dominance, and imprinting effects. The results showed a significant non-zero contribution from dominance to production traits but not to reproduction traits. Imprinting effects significantly contributed to both production and reproduction traits. Interestingly, imprinting effects contributed more to reproduction traits than to production traits. Using GWAS and imputation-based fine-mapping analyses, we identified and validated a dominance association signal with milk yield near RUNX2, a candidate gene that has been associated with milk production in mice. When adding non-additive effects into the prediction models, however, we observed little or no increase in prediction accuracy for the eight traits analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively, our results suggested that non-additive effects contributed a non-negligible amount (more for reproduction traits) to the total genetic variance of complex traits in cattle, and detection of QTLs with non-additive effect is possible in GWAS using a large dataset.

Genomic prediction using models with dominance and imprinting effects for backfat thickness and average daily gain in Danish Duroc pigs

BACKGROUND

Dominance and imprinting genetic effects have been shown to contribute to genetic variance for certain traits but are usually ignored in genomic prediction of complex traits in livestock. The objectives of this study were to estimate variances of additive, dominance and imprinting genetic effects and to evaluate predictions of genetic merit based on genomic data for average daily gain (DG) and backfat thickness (BF) in Danish Duroc pigs.

METHODS

Corrected phenotypes of 8113 genotyped pigs from breeding and multiplier herds were used. Four Bayesian mixture models that differed in the type of genetic effects included: (A) additive genetic effects, (AD) additive and dominance genetic effects, (AI) additive and imprinting genetic effects, and (ADI) additive, dominance and imprinting genetic effects were compared using Bayes factors. The ability of the models to predict genetic merit was compared with regard to prediction reliability and bias.

RESULTS

Based on model ADI, narrow-sense heritabilities of 0.18 and 0.31 were estimated for DG and BF, respectively. Dominance and imprinting genetic effects accounted for 4.0 to 4.6 and 1.3 to 1.4 % of phenotypic variance, respectively, which were statistically significant. Across the four models, reliabilities of the predicted total genetic values (GTV, sum of all genetic effects) ranged from 16.1 (AI) to 18.4 % (AD) for DG and from 30.1 (AI) to 31.4 % (ADI) for BF. The least biased predictions of GTV were obtained with model AD, with regression coefficients of corrected phenotypes on GTV equal to 0.824 (DG) and 0.738 (BF). Reliabilities of genomic estimated breeding values (GBV, additive genetic effects) did not differ significantly among models for DG (between 16.5 and 16.7 %); however, for BF, model AD provided a significantly higher reliability (31.3 %) than model A (30.7 %). The least biased predictions of GBV were obtained with model AD with regression coefficients of 0.872 for DG and 0.764 for BF.

CONCLUSIONS

Dominance and genomic imprinting effects contribute significantly to the genetic variation of BF and DG in Danish Duroc pigs. Genomic prediction models that include dominance genetic effects can improve accuracy and reduce bias of genomic predictions of genetic merit.

Incorporating parent-of-origin effects in whole-genome prediction of complex traits

Background

Parent-of-origin effects are due to differential contributions of paternal and maternal lineages to offspring phenotypes. Such effects include, for example, maternal effects in several species. However, epigenetically induced parent-of-origin effects have recently attracted attention due to their potential impact on variation of complex traits. Given that prediction of genetic merit or phenotypic performance is of interest in the study of complex traits, it is relevant to consider parent-of-origin effects in such predictions. We built a whole-genome prediction model that incorporates parent-of-origin effects by considering parental allele substitution effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms and gametic relationships derived from a pedigree (the POE model). We used this model to predict body mass index in a mouse population, a trait that is presumably affected by parent-of-origin effects, and also compared the prediction performance to that of a standard additive model that ignores parent-of-origin effects (the ADD model). We also used simulated data to assess the predictive performance of the POE model under various circumstances, in which parent-of-origin effects were generated by mimicking an imprinting mechanism.

Results

The POE model did not predict better than the ADD model in the real data analysis, probably due to overfitting, since the POE model had far more parameters than the ADD model. However, when applied to simulated data, the POE model outperformed the ADD model when the contribution of parent-of-origin effects to phenotypic variation increased. The superiority of the POE model over the ADD model was up to 8 % on predictive correlation and 5 % on predictive mean squared error.

Conclusions

The simulation and the negative result obtained in the real data analysis indicated that, in order to gain benefit from the POE model in terms of prediction, a sizable contribution of parent-of-origin effects to variation is needed and such variation must be captured by the genetic markers fitted. Recent studies, however, suggest that most parent-of-origin effects stem from epigenetic regulation but not from a change in DNA sequence. Therefore, integrating epigenetic information with genetic markers may help to account for parent-of-origin effects in whole-genome prediction.