在存在致病变异的情况下,多步和单步基因组BLUP的替代SNP权重。

IF 1.9 3区 农林科学 Q2 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Bruna Folegatti Santana, Molly Riser, El Hamidi A. Hay, Breno de Oliveira Fragomeni
{"title":"在存在致病变异的情况下,多步和单步基因组BLUP的替代SNP权重。","authors":"Bruna Folegatti Santana,&nbsp;Molly Riser,&nbsp;El Hamidi A. Hay,&nbsp;Breno de Oliveira Fragomeni","doi":"10.1111/jbg.12817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The accuracy of genetic selection in dairy can be increased by the adoption of new technologies, such as the inclusion of sequence data. In simulation studies, assigning different weights to causative single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers led to better predictions depending on the genomic prediction method used. However, it is still not clear how the weights should be calculated. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of a multi-step method (GBLUP) and single-step GBLUP with simulated data using regular SNP, causatives variants (QTN) and the combination of both. Additionally, we compared the accuracies of all previous scenarios using alternatives for SNP weighting. The data were simulated assuming a single trait with a heritability of 0.3. The effective population size (<i>Ne</i>) was approximately 200. The pedigree contained 440,000 animals, and approximately 16,800 individuals were genotyped. A total of 49,974 SNP markers were evenly placed throughout the genome, and 100, 1000 and 2000 causative QTN were simulated. Both GBLUP and ssGBLUP were used in this study. We evaluated quadratic and nonlinear SNP weights in addition to the unweighted <b>G</b>. The inclusion of QTN to panels led to significant accuracy gains. Nonlinear A was demonstrated to be superior to quadratic weighting and unweighted approaches; however, results from Nonlinear A were dependent on the equation parameters. The unweighted approach was more suitable for less polygenic scenarios. Finally, SNP weighting might help elucidate trait architecture features based on changes in the accuracy of genomic prediction.</p>","PeriodicalId":54885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternative SNP weighting for multi-step and single-step genomic BLUP in the presence of causative variants\",\"authors\":\"Bruna Folegatti Santana,&nbsp;Molly Riser,&nbsp;El Hamidi A. Hay,&nbsp;Breno de Oliveira Fragomeni\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jbg.12817\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The accuracy of genetic selection in dairy can be increased by the adoption of new technologies, such as the inclusion of sequence data. In simulation studies, assigning different weights to causative single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers led to better predictions depending on the genomic prediction method used. However, it is still not clear how the weights should be calculated. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of a multi-step method (GBLUP) and single-step GBLUP with simulated data using regular SNP, causatives variants (QTN) and the combination of both. Additionally, we compared the accuracies of all previous scenarios using alternatives for SNP weighting. The data were simulated assuming a single trait with a heritability of 0.3. The effective population size (<i>Ne</i>) was approximately 200. The pedigree contained 440,000 animals, and approximately 16,800 individuals were genotyped. A total of 49,974 SNP markers were evenly placed throughout the genome, and 100, 1000 and 2000 causative QTN were simulated. Both GBLUP and ssGBLUP were used in this study. We evaluated quadratic and nonlinear SNP weights in addition to the unweighted <b>G</b>. The inclusion of QTN to panels led to significant accuracy gains. Nonlinear A was demonstrated to be superior to quadratic weighting and unweighted approaches; however, results from Nonlinear A were dependent on the equation parameters. The unweighted approach was more suitable for less polygenic scenarios. Finally, SNP weighting might help elucidate trait architecture features based on changes in the accuracy of genomic prediction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbg.12817\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbg.12817","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

乳制品中基因选择的准确性可以通过采用新技术来提高,例如包含序列数据。在模拟研究中,根据所使用的基因组预测方法,将不同的权重分配给致病单核苷酸多态性(SNP)标记可以得到更好的预测。然而,目前还不清楚应该如何计算权重。我们的目的是评估多步骤方法(GBLUP)和单步GBLUP的准确性,模拟数据使用常规SNP、因果变异(QTN)以及两者的组合。此外,我们使用SNP加权的替代方案比较了所有先前场景的准确性。假设一个遗传力为0.3的单一性状,对数据进行模拟。有效种群规模(Ne)约为200。该谱系包含440000只动物,约16800只个体进行了基因分型。共有49974个SNP标记均匀地分布在整个基因组中,并模拟了100、1000和2000个致病QTN。本研究同时使用GBLUP和ssGBLUP。除了未加权的G之外,我们还评估了二次和非线性SNP权重。将QTN纳入面板可显著提高准确性。非线性A被证明优于二次加权和未加权方法;然而,非线性A的结果取决于方程参数。未加权方法更适用于多基因较少的情况。最后,SNP加权可能有助于基于基因组预测准确性的变化来阐明性状结构特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Alternative SNP weighting for multi-step and single-step genomic BLUP in the presence of causative variants

The accuracy of genetic selection in dairy can be increased by the adoption of new technologies, such as the inclusion of sequence data. In simulation studies, assigning different weights to causative single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers led to better predictions depending on the genomic prediction method used. However, it is still not clear how the weights should be calculated. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of a multi-step method (GBLUP) and single-step GBLUP with simulated data using regular SNP, causatives variants (QTN) and the combination of both. Additionally, we compared the accuracies of all previous scenarios using alternatives for SNP weighting. The data were simulated assuming a single trait with a heritability of 0.3. The effective population size (Ne) was approximately 200. The pedigree contained 440,000 animals, and approximately 16,800 individuals were genotyped. A total of 49,974 SNP markers were evenly placed throughout the genome, and 100, 1000 and 2000 causative QTN were simulated. Both GBLUP and ssGBLUP were used in this study. We evaluated quadratic and nonlinear SNP weights in addition to the unweighted G. The inclusion of QTN to panels led to significant accuracy gains. Nonlinear A was demonstrated to be superior to quadratic weighting and unweighted approaches; however, results from Nonlinear A were dependent on the equation parameters. The unweighted approach was more suitable for less polygenic scenarios. Finally, SNP weighting might help elucidate trait architecture features based on changes in the accuracy of genomic prediction.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics
Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.80%
发文量
58
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics publishes original articles by international scientists on genomic selection, and any other topic related to breeding programmes, selection, quantitative genetic, genomics, diversity and evolution of domestic animals. Researchers, teachers, and the animal breeding industry will find the reports of interest. Book reviews appear in many issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信