预选对肉鸡种群偏差水平和准确性的影响,一项模拟研究。

IF 1.9 3区 农林科学 Q2 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Charlie A de Hollander, Thinh T Chu, Danye Marois, Vivian B Felipe, Fernando B Lopes, Mario P L Calus
{"title":"预选对肉鸡种群偏差水平和准确性的影响,一项模拟研究。","authors":"Charlie A de Hollander, Thinh T Chu, Danye Marois, Vivian B Felipe, Fernando B Lopes, Mario P L Calus","doi":"10.1111/jbg.12908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many breeding programmes have to perform preselection, as genotyping and phenotyping all potential breeder candidates is often not a feasible option. There is need to understand how preselection affects the quality of the genomic estimated breeding values (EBVs) at final selection and thereby can affect genetic progress. This simulation study evaluated nine different preselection strategies in a broiler breeder programme and their effect on the quality of the (genomic) EBVs and genetic progress for three different traits: body weight (Body Weight), residual feed intake (RFI) and body weight gain (Gain). All birds have Body Weight recorded at preselection, but only the preselected birds were phenotyped for RFI and Gain and genotyped. The following criteria and intensities were studied: preselection based on phenotypic Body Weight (P), on a BLUP index (B) or on an ssGBLUP Index (G). Additionally, all criteria were studied with three different selection intensities, 10% of the males and 30% of the females (P10, B10, G10), 15% of the males and 45% of the females (P15, B15, G15) and 20% of the males and 60% of the females (P20, B20, G20). The accuracy at preselection with G10 was more accurate than B10 for both RFI and Gain (0.71 vs. 0.58 and 0.65 vs. 0.55 respectively), and also G15 was more accurate than B15 for both RFI and Gain (0.72 vs. 0.63 and 0.67 vs. 0.64 respectively); thus, the difference in accuracy reduces with an increasing number of birds being preselected. Differences in accuracy at final selection were mostly notable in the RFI trait between P10, B10 and G10, where G10 showed the highest accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.84 vs. 0.86 respectively). This difference in accuracy for RFI disappeared when more animals were preselected. For Body Weight and Gain, the BLUP preselection resulted in the highest accuracy at final selection when selection intensity decreased. The dispersion bias of EBVs at final selection was most pronounced in the P10 and P15 for Body Weight (0.81 and 0.92) but disappeared at P20 (0.97). The dispersion bias for all other criteria and traits was relatively small. Genetic progress was mostly affected when P10 or P15 was used at preselection, where the progress in Body Weight was noticeably higher, but prominently lower for RFI and Gain. The BLUP and ssGBLUP preselection had very similar genetic progress across traits and showed comparable improvements in the selection index. In conclusion, with high preselection intensity, the use of ssGBLUP at preselection might be favoured as there is an improvement in genetic progress across traits in all scenarios, which is due to the increased preselection accuracy. When preselection intensity decreases, the benefit of using ssGBLUP over BLUP at preselection disappears.</p>","PeriodicalId":54885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of Preselection on the Level of Bias and Accuracy in a Broiler Breeder Population, a Simulation Study.\",\"authors\":\"Charlie A de Hollander, Thinh T Chu, Danye Marois, Vivian B Felipe, Fernando B Lopes, Mario P L Calus\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jbg.12908\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Many breeding programmes have to perform preselection, as genotyping and phenotyping all potential breeder candidates is often not a feasible option. There is need to understand how preselection affects the quality of the genomic estimated breeding values (EBVs) at final selection and thereby can affect genetic progress. This simulation study evaluated nine different preselection strategies in a broiler breeder programme and their effect on the quality of the (genomic) EBVs and genetic progress for three different traits: body weight (Body Weight), residual feed intake (RFI) and body weight gain (Gain). All birds have Body Weight recorded at preselection, but only the preselected birds were phenotyped for RFI and Gain and genotyped. The following criteria and intensities were studied: preselection based on phenotypic Body Weight (P), on a BLUP index (B) or on an ssGBLUP Index (G). Additionally, all criteria were studied with three different selection intensities, 10% of the males and 30% of the females (P10, B10, G10), 15% of the males and 45% of the females (P15, B15, G15) and 20% of the males and 60% of the females (P20, B20, G20). The accuracy at preselection with G10 was more accurate than B10 for both RFI and Gain (0.71 vs. 0.58 and 0.65 vs. 0.55 respectively), and also G15 was more accurate than B15 for both RFI and Gain (0.72 vs. 0.63 and 0.67 vs. 0.64 respectively); thus, the difference in accuracy reduces with an increasing number of birds being preselected. Differences in accuracy at final selection were mostly notable in the RFI trait between P10, B10 and G10, where G10 showed the highest accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.84 vs. 0.86 respectively). This difference in accuracy for RFI disappeared when more animals were preselected. For Body Weight and Gain, the BLUP preselection resulted in the highest accuracy at final selection when selection intensity decreased. The dispersion bias of EBVs at final selection was most pronounced in the P10 and P15 for Body Weight (0.81 and 0.92) but disappeared at P20 (0.97). The dispersion bias for all other criteria and traits was relatively small. Genetic progress was mostly affected when P10 or P15 was used at preselection, where the progress in Body Weight was noticeably higher, but prominently lower for RFI and Gain. The BLUP and ssGBLUP preselection had very similar genetic progress across traits and showed comparable improvements in the selection index. In conclusion, with high preselection intensity, the use of ssGBLUP at preselection might be favoured as there is an improvement in genetic progress across traits in all scenarios, which is due to the increased preselection accuracy. When preselection intensity decreases, the benefit of using ssGBLUP over BLUP at preselection disappears.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"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://doi.org/10.1111/jbg.12908\",\"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://doi.org/10.1111/jbg.12908","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

许多育种计划都必须进行预选,因为对所有潜在候选育种家进行基因分型和表型分型往往并不可行。有必要了解预选如何影响最终选择时基因组估计育种值(EBV)的质量,从而影响遗传进展。本模拟研究评估了肉种鸡项目中的九种不同预选策略及其对(基因组)EBV 质量和三种不同性状遗传进展的影响:体重(Body Weight)、剩余采食量(RFI)和增重(Gain)。所有家禽在预选时都记录了体重,但只有预选的家禽进行了RFI和增重的表型分析和基因分型。研究了以下标准和强度:基于表型体重(P)、BLUP 指数(B)或ssGBLUP 指数(G)的预选。此外,还研究了所有标准的三种不同选择强度:10% 的雄性和 30% 的雌性(P10、B10、G10)、15% 的雄性和 45% 的雌性(P15、B15、G15)以及 20% 的雄性和 60% 的雌性(P20、B20、G20)。在 RFI 和 Gain 两项指标上,G10 的预选准确率均高于 B10(分别为 0.71 vs. 0.58 和 0.65 vs. 0.55);在 RFI 和 Gain 两项指标上,G15 的预选准确率也高于 B15(分别为 0.72 vs. 0.63 和 0.67 vs. 0.64);因此,随着预选鸽子数量的增加,准确率的差异也在缩小。最终选择时的准确率差异主要体现在 P10、B10 和 G10 之间的 RFI 性状上,其中 G10 的准确率最高(分别为 0.82 vs. 0.84 vs. 0.86)。当预选更多动物时,RFI 的准确性差异消失。在体重和增重方面,当选择强度降低时,BLUP 预选在最终选择时的准确率最高。体重的 EBVs 在最终选择时的分散偏差在 P10 和 P15 时最为明显(0.81 和 0.92),但在 P20 时消失(0.97)。所有其他标准和性状的分散偏差相对较小。在预选时使用 P10 或 P15 时,遗传进展主要受到影响,体重的进展明显较高,但 RFI 和增重的进展明显较低。BLUP 和 ssGBLUP 预选在各性状上的遗传进展非常相似,在选择指数上的改进也不相上下。总之,在预选强度较高的情况下,在预选时使用 ssGBLUP 可能更受欢迎,因为在所有情况下,各性状的遗传进展都有所改善,这是因为预选精度提高了。当预选强度降低时,在预选时使用 ssGBLUP 而不是 BLUP 的优势就会消失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effect of Preselection on the Level of Bias and Accuracy in a Broiler Breeder Population, a Simulation Study.

Many breeding programmes have to perform preselection, as genotyping and phenotyping all potential breeder candidates is often not a feasible option. There is need to understand how preselection affects the quality of the genomic estimated breeding values (EBVs) at final selection and thereby can affect genetic progress. This simulation study evaluated nine different preselection strategies in a broiler breeder programme and their effect on the quality of the (genomic) EBVs and genetic progress for three different traits: body weight (Body Weight), residual feed intake (RFI) and body weight gain (Gain). All birds have Body Weight recorded at preselection, but only the preselected birds were phenotyped for RFI and Gain and genotyped. The following criteria and intensities were studied: preselection based on phenotypic Body Weight (P), on a BLUP index (B) or on an ssGBLUP Index (G). Additionally, all criteria were studied with three different selection intensities, 10% of the males and 30% of the females (P10, B10, G10), 15% of the males and 45% of the females (P15, B15, G15) and 20% of the males and 60% of the females (P20, B20, G20). The accuracy at preselection with G10 was more accurate than B10 for both RFI and Gain (0.71 vs. 0.58 and 0.65 vs. 0.55 respectively), and also G15 was more accurate than B15 for both RFI and Gain (0.72 vs. 0.63 and 0.67 vs. 0.64 respectively); thus, the difference in accuracy reduces with an increasing number of birds being preselected. Differences in accuracy at final selection were mostly notable in the RFI trait between P10, B10 and G10, where G10 showed the highest accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.84 vs. 0.86 respectively). This difference in accuracy for RFI disappeared when more animals were preselected. For Body Weight and Gain, the BLUP preselection resulted in the highest accuracy at final selection when selection intensity decreased. The dispersion bias of EBVs at final selection was most pronounced in the P10 and P15 for Body Weight (0.81 and 0.92) but disappeared at P20 (0.97). The dispersion bias for all other criteria and traits was relatively small. Genetic progress was mostly affected when P10 or P15 was used at preselection, where the progress in Body Weight was noticeably higher, but prominently lower for RFI and Gain. The BLUP and ssGBLUP preselection had very similar genetic progress across traits and showed comparable improvements in the selection index. In conclusion, with high preselection intensity, the use of ssGBLUP at preselection might be favoured as there is an improvement in genetic progress across traits in all scenarios, which is due to the increased preselection accuracy. When preselection intensity decreases, the benefit of using ssGBLUP over BLUP at preselection disappears.

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