14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

      Why publish your research Open Access with G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics?

      Learn more and submit today!

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessing Predictive Properties of Genome-Wide Selection in Soybeans

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Many economically important traits in plant breeding have low heritability or are difficult to measure. For these traits, genomic selection has attractive features and may boost genetic gains. Our goal was to evaluate alternative scenarios to implement genomic selection for yield components in soybean ( Glycine max L. merr). We used a nested association panel with cross validation to evaluate the impacts of training population size, genotyping density, and prediction model on the accuracy of genomic prediction. Our results indicate that training population size was the factor most relevant to improvement in genome-wide prediction, with greatest improvement observed in training sets up to 2000 individuals. We discuss assumptions that influence the choice of the prediction model. Although alternative models had minor impacts on prediction accuracy, the most robust prediction model was the combination of reproducing kernel Hilbert space regression and BayesB. Higher genotyping density marginally improved accuracy. Our study finds that breeding programs seeking efficient genomic selection in soybeans would best allocate resources by investing in a representative training set.

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Improving accuracy of genomic predictions within and between dairy cattle breeds with imputed high-density single nucleotide polymorphism panels.

          Achieving accurate genomic estimated breeding values for dairy cattle requires a very large reference population of genotyped and phenotyped individuals. Assembling such reference populations has been achieved for breeds such as Holstein, but is challenging for breeds with fewer individuals. An alternative is to use a multi-breed reference population, such that smaller breeds gain some advantage in accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) from information from larger breeds. However, this requires that marker-quantitative trait loci associations persist across breeds. Here, we assessed the gain in accuracy of GEBV in Jersey cattle as a result of using a combined Holstein and Jersey reference population, with either 39,745 or 624,213 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers. The surrogate used for accuracy was the correlation of GEBV with daughter trait deviations in a validation population. Two methods were used to predict breeding values, either a genomic BLUP (GBLUP_mod), or a new method, BayesR, which used a mixture of normal distributions as the prior for SNP effects, including one distribution that set SNP effects to zero. The GBLUP_mod method scaled both the genomic relationship matrix and the additive relationship matrix to a base at the time the breeds diverged, and regressed the genomic relationship matrix to account for sampling errors in estimating relationship coefficients due to a finite number of markers, before combining the 2 matrices. Although these modifications did result in less biased breeding values for Jerseys compared with an unmodified genomic relationship matrix, BayesR gave the highest accuracies of GEBV for the 3 traits investigated (milk yield, fat yield, and protein yield), with an average increase in accuracy compared with GBLUP_mod across the 3 traits of 0.05 for both Jerseys and Holsteins. The advantage was limited for either Jerseys or Holsteins in using 624,213 SNP rather than 39,745 SNP (0.01 for Holsteins and 0.03 for Jerseys, averaged across traits). Even this limited and nonsignificant advantage was only observed when BayesR was used. An alternative panel, which extracted the SNP in the transcribed part of the bovine genome from the 624,213 SNP panel (to give 58,532 SNP), performed better, with an increase in accuracy of 0.03 for Jerseys across traits. This panel captures much of the increased genomic content of the 624,213 SNP panel, with the advantage of a greatly reduced number of SNP effects to estimate. Taken together, using this panel, a combined breed reference and using BayesR rather than GBLUP_mod increased the accuracy of GEBV in Jerseys from 0.43 to 0.52, averaged across the 3 traits. Copyright © 2012 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Impacts of genetic bottlenecks on soybean genome diversity.

            Soybean has undergone several genetic bottlenecks. These include domestication in Asia to produce numerous Asian landraces, introduction of relatively few landraces to North America, and then selective breeding over the past 75 years. It is presumed that these three human-mediated events have reduced genetic diversity. We sequenced 111 fragments from 102 genes in four soybean populations representing the populations before and after genetic bottlenecks. We show that soybean has lost many rare sequence variants and has undergone numerous allele frequency changes throughout its history. Although soybean genetic diversity has been eroded by human selection after domestication, it is notable that modern cultivars have retained 72% of the sequence diversity present in the Asian landraces but lost 79% of rare alleles (frequency
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Priors in whole-genome regression: the bayesian alphabet returns.

              Whole-genome enabled prediction of complex traits has received enormous attention in animal and plant breeding and is making inroads into human and even Drosophila genetics. The term "Bayesian alphabet" denotes a growing number of letters of the alphabet used to denote various Bayesian linear regressions that differ in the priors adopted, while sharing the same sampling model. We explore the role of the prior distribution in whole-genome regression models for dissecting complex traits in what is now a standard situation with genomic data where the number of unknown parameters (p) typically exceeds sample size (n). Members of the alphabet aim to confront this overparameterization in various manners, but it is shown here that the prior is always influential, unless n ≫ p. This happens because parameters are not likelihood identified, so Bayesian learning is imperfect. Since inferences are not devoid of the influence of the prior, claims about genetic architecture from these methods should be taken with caution. However, all such procedures may deliver reasonable predictions of complex traits, provided that some parameters ("tuning knobs") are assessed via a properly conducted cross-validation. It is concluded that members of the alphabet have a room in whole-genome prediction of phenotypes, but have somewhat doubtful inferential value, at least when sample size is such that n ≪ p.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                G3 (Bethesda)
                Genetics
                G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
                G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
                G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
                G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics
                Genetics Society of America
                2160-1836
                17 June 2016
                August 2016
                : 6
                : 8
                : 2611-2616
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
                []Department of Animal Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
                Author notes
                [1 ]Corresponding author: Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, 915 W. State St., West Lafayette, IN 47907. E-mail: krainey@ 123456purdue.edu
                Article
                GGG_032268
                10.1534/g3.116.032268
                4978914
                27317786
                633389aa-fc8d-4387-ad79-eae9c5794d16
                Copyright © 2016 Xavie et al.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 04 March 2016
                : 16 June 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, Equations: 0, References: 60, Pages: 6
                Categories
                Investigations

                Genetics
                bayesian methods,genomic selection,machine learning,soynam
                Genetics
                bayesian methods, genomic selection, machine learning, soynam

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log