6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Genomic Predictions Using Low-Density SNP Markers, Pedigree and GWAS Information: A Case Study with the Non-Model Species Eucalyptus cladocalyx

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          High-throughput genotyping techniques have enabled large-scale genomic analysis to precisely predict complex traits in many plant species. However, not all species can be well represented in commercial SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) arrays. In this study, a high-density SNP array (60 K) developed for commercial Eucalyptus was used to genotype a breeding population of Eucalyptus cladocalyx, yielding only ~3.9 K informative SNPs. Traditional Bayesian genomic models were investigated to predict flowering, stem quality and growth traits by considering the following effects: (i) polygenic background and all informative markers (GS model) and (ii) polygenic background, QTL-genotype effects (determined by GWAS) and SNP markers that were not associated with any trait (GSq model). The estimates of pedigree-based heritability and genomic heritability varied from 0.08 to 0.34 and 0.002 to 0.5, respectively, whereas the predictive ability varied from 0.19 (GS) and 0.45 (GSq). The GSq approach outperformed GS models in terms of predictive ability when the proportion of the variance explained by the significant marker-trait associations was higher than those explained by the polygenic background and non-significant markers. This approach can be particularly useful for plant/tree species poorly represented in the high-density SNP arrays, developed for economically important species, or when high-density marker panels are not available.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • 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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Accuracy of Genomic Selection Methods in a Standard Data Set of Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda L.)

            Genomic selection can increase genetic gain per generation through early selection. Genomic selection is expected to be particularly valuable for traits that are costly to phenotype and expressed late in the life cycle of long-lived species. Alternative approaches to genomic selection prediction models may perform differently for traits with distinct genetic properties. Here the performance of four different original methods of genomic selection that differ with respect to assumptions regarding distribution of marker effects, including (i) ridge regression–best linear unbiased prediction (RR–BLUP), (ii) Bayes A, (iii) Bayes Cπ, and (iv) Bayesian LASSO are presented. In addition, a modified RR–BLUP (RR–BLUP B) that utilizes a selected subset of markers was evaluated. The accuracy of these methods was compared across 17 traits with distinct heritabilities and genetic architectures, including growth, development, and disease-resistance properties, measured in a Pinus taeda (loblolly pine) training population of 951 individuals genotyped with 4853 SNPs. The predictive ability of the methods was evaluated using a 10-fold, cross-validation approach, and differed only marginally for most method/trait combinations. Interestingly, for fusiform rust disease-resistance traits, Bayes Cπ, Bayes A, and RR–BLUB B had higher predictive ability than RR–BLUP and Bayesian LASSO. Fusiform rust is controlled by few genes of large effect. A limitation of RR–BLUP is the assumption of equal contribution of all markers to the observed variation. However, RR-BLUP B performed equally well as the Bayesian approaches.The genotypic and phenotypic data used in this study are publically available for comparative analysis of genomic selection prediction models.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Potential and Optimization of Genomic Selection for Fusarium Head Blight Resistance in Six-Row Barley

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Plants (Basel)
                Plants (Basel)
                plants
                Plants
                MDPI
                2223-7747
                13 January 2020
                January 2020
                : 9
                : 1
                : 99
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Talca, 2 Norte 685, Talca 3460000, Chile; pballesta@ 123456utalca.cl
                [2 ]CSIRO–Australian Tree Seed Centre, Acton 2601, Australia; David.Bush@ 123456csiro.au
                [3 ]Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa 36570-900, Brazil; fabyanofonseca@ 123456ufv.br
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: fmora@ 123456utalca.cl
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8113-0231
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4845-3549
                Article
                plants-09-00099
                10.3390/plants9010099
                7020392
                31941085
                b09c4a49-bf14-41e9-b87a-5c0d8e485b9c
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 25 November 2019
                : 09 January 2020
                Categories
                Article

                bayesian models,deviance information criterion,marker-trait associations,predictive ability

                Comments

                Comment on this article