Comparing genomic studies in animal breeding and human genetics: Focus on disease-related traits in livestock.

Abstract

Genomic studies of diseases can be divided into two types: (1) analyses that reveal causal genes by focusing on linkage disequilibrium between observed and causal variants and (2) those that simultaneously assess numerous genetic markers to estimate the polygenic effects of a particular genomic region or entire genome. The field of human genetics has emphasized the discovery of causal genes, but these represent only a fraction of the total genetic variance. Therefore, alternative approaches, such as the polygenic risk score, which estimates the genetic risk for a given trait or disease on the basis of all genetic markers (rather than on known causal variants only), have begun to garner attention. In many respects, these human genetic methods are similar to those originally developed for the estimation of breeding values (i.e., total additive genetic effects) in livestock. However, despite these similarities in methods, the fields of human and animal genetics still differ markedly in terms of research objectives, target populations, and other characteristics. For example, livestock populations have continually been selected and inbred throughout their history; consequently, their effective population size has shrunk and preferred genes (such as those influencing disease resistance and production traits) have accumulated in the modern breeding populations. By examining the characteristics of these two fields, particularly from the perspectives of disease and disease resistance, this review aims to improve understanding of the intrinsic differences between genomic studies using human compared with livestock populations.