Effect of selection and selective genotyping for creation of reference on bias and accuracy of genomic prediction. (19th June 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gowane, Gopal R.; Lee, Sang Hong; Clark, Sam; Moghaddar, Nasir; Al‐Mamun, Hawlader A.; van der Werf, Julius H. J.
• Is Part Of: Journal of animal breeding and genetics. Volume 136:Number 5(2019)
• Page Start: 390
• Page End: 407
• Publication Date: 2019-06-19
• Subjects: genomic selection -- GWAS -- prediction bias -- selective genotyping -- single‐step GBLUP; Livestock -- Breeding -- Periodicals; Livestock -- Genetics -- Periodicals; 636.0820
• DOI: 10.1111/jbg.12420
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0931-2668

Abstract

Abstract: Reference populations for genomic selection usually involve selected individuals, which may result in biased prediction of estimated genomic breeding values (GEBV). In a simulation study, bias and accuracy of GEBV were explored for various genetic models with individuals selectively genotyped in a typical nucleus breeding program. We compared the performance of three existing methods, that is, Best Linear Unbiased Prediction of breeding values using pedigree‐based relationships (PBLUP), genomic relationships for genotyped animals only (GBLUP) and a Single‐Step approach (SSGBLUP) using both. For a scenario with no‐selection and random mating (RR), prediction was unbiased. However, lower accuracy and bias were observed for scenarios with selection and random mating (SR) or selection and positive assortative mating (SA). As expected, bias disappeared when all individuals were genotyped and used in GBLUP. SSGBLUP showed higher accuracy compared to GBLUP, and bias of prediction was negligible with SR. However, PBLUP and SSGBLUP still showed bias in SA due to high inbreeding. SSGBLUP and PBLUP were unbiased provided that inbreeding was accounted for in the relationship matrices. Selective genotyping based on extreme phenotypic contrasts increased the prediction accuracy, but prediction was biased when using GBLUP. SSGBLUP could correct the biasedness while gaining higher accuracy than GBLUP. In a typical animal breeding program, where it is too expensive to genotype all animals, it would be appropriate to genotype phenotypically contrasting selection candidates and use a Single‐Step approach to obtain accurate and unbiased prediction of GEBV.