评价不同优势基因型编码对全基因组关联研究和基因组选择的影响。

IF 2.5 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Animal Bioscience Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-31 DOI:10.5713/ab.24.0658
Xiangyu Dai, Jiakun Qiao, Zhiwei Long, Zhaoxuan Che, Fangjun Xu, Na Miao, Mengjin Zhu
{"title":"评价不同优势基因型编码对全基因组关联研究和基因组选择的影响。","authors":"Xiangyu Dai, Jiakun Qiao, Zhiwei Long, Zhaoxuan Che, Fangjun Xu, Na Miao, Mengjin Zhu","doi":"10.5713/ab.24.0658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The quantification of dominance effects varies across different models, and the appropriate coding in genetic analyses remains debated. This study investigated several proposed dominance encoding methods, evaluating their performance in genetic analyses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three datasets, each representing the breeds Duroc, Landrace, and Yorkshire, were used in this study. We assessed heritability, genetic effects, and prediction accuracy in genomic selection (GS), as well as significant loci and statistical power in genome-wide association studies (GWAS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In GS, correlations among additive effects and among total genetic effects across models were high (0.9 to 1) under different dominance encodings for most traits, while only the (0, 1, 0) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings maintained high correlations for all traits. The average prediction accuracy of the additive-dominance model with the (0, 1, 0) encoding increased by 2.79% and 1.69%, respectively, compared to the (0, 1, 1) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings for all traits. In GWAS, the (0, 1, 0) encoding had higher statistical power compared to the (0, 1, 1) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings, especially for rare variants. Additionally, different dominance encodings identified independent and distinct significant loci.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The (0, 1, 0) encoding method generally outperforms the others in genetic analyses, while alternative encodings provide complementary insights into dominance effects. These findings provide valuable guidance for selecting dominance encodings in genetic analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":7825,"journal":{"name":"Animal Bioscience","volume":" ","pages":"2067-2078"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12415359/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating effect of different dominance genotype encodings on genome-wide association studies and genomic selection.\",\"authors\":\"Xiangyu Dai, Jiakun Qiao, Zhiwei Long, Zhaoxuan Che, Fangjun Xu, Na Miao, Mengjin Zhu\",\"doi\":\"10.5713/ab.24.0658\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The quantification of dominance effects varies across different models, and the appropriate coding in genetic analyses remains debated. This study investigated several proposed dominance encoding methods, evaluating their performance in genetic analyses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three datasets, each representing the breeds Duroc, Landrace, and Yorkshire, were used in this study. We assessed heritability, genetic effects, and prediction accuracy in genomic selection (GS), as well as significant loci and statistical power in genome-wide association studies (GWAS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In GS, correlations among additive effects and among total genetic effects across models were high (0.9 to 1) under different dominance encodings for most traits, while only the (0, 1, 0) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings maintained high correlations for all traits. The average prediction accuracy of the additive-dominance model with the (0, 1, 0) encoding increased by 2.79% and 1.69%, respectively, compared to the (0, 1, 1) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings for all traits. In GWAS, the (0, 1, 0) encoding had higher statistical power compared to the (0, 1, 1) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings, especially for rare variants. Additionally, different dominance encodings identified independent and distinct significant loci.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The (0, 1, 0) encoding method generally outperforms the others in genetic analyses, while alternative encodings provide complementary insights into dominance effects. These findings provide valuable guidance for selecting dominance encodings in genetic analyses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7825,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Animal Bioscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2067-2078\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12415359/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Animal Bioscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5713/ab.24.0658\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Bioscience","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5713/ab.24.0658","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:显性效应的量化在不同的模型中存在差异,遗传分析中适当的编码仍然存在争议。本文研究了几种显性编码方法,并对其在遗传分析中的表现进行了评价。方法:本研究使用了三个数据集,分别代表杜洛克、长白和约克郡的品种。我们评估了基因组选择(GS)的遗传力、遗传效应和预测准确性,以及全基因组关联研究(GWAS)中的显著位点和统计能力。结果:在GS中,大多数性状在不同显性编码下,加性效应与总遗传效应之间的相关系数均为0.9-1,只有(0,1,0)和(0,2p, 4p-2)编码在所有性状中保持高相关。与(0,1,0)和(0,2p, 4p-2)编码相比,(0,1,0)编码的加性优势模型对所有性状的平均预测准确率分别提高了2.79%和1.69%。在GWAS中,(0,1,0)编码比(0,1,1)和(0,2p, 4p-2)编码具有更高的统计能力,特别是对于罕见的变体。此外,不同的显性编码鉴定出独立且不同的显著位点。结论:在遗传分析中,(0,1,0)编码方法通常优于其他编码方法,而其他编码方法可以提供互补的优势效应见解。这些发现为遗传分析中显性编码的选择提供了有价值的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating effect of different dominance genotype encodings on genome-wide association studies and genomic selection.

Objective: The quantification of dominance effects varies across different models, and the appropriate coding in genetic analyses remains debated. This study investigated several proposed dominance encoding methods, evaluating their performance in genetic analyses.

Methods: Three datasets, each representing the breeds Duroc, Landrace, and Yorkshire, were used in this study. We assessed heritability, genetic effects, and prediction accuracy in genomic selection (GS), as well as significant loci and statistical power in genome-wide association studies (GWAS).

Results: In GS, correlations among additive effects and among total genetic effects across models were high (0.9 to 1) under different dominance encodings for most traits, while only the (0, 1, 0) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings maintained high correlations for all traits. The average prediction accuracy of the additive-dominance model with the (0, 1, 0) encoding increased by 2.79% and 1.69%, respectively, compared to the (0, 1, 1) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings for all traits. In GWAS, the (0, 1, 0) encoding had higher statistical power compared to the (0, 1, 1) and (0, 2p, 4p-2) encodings, especially for rare variants. Additionally, different dominance encodings identified independent and distinct significant loci.

Conclusion: The (0, 1, 0) encoding method generally outperforms the others in genetic analyses, while alternative encodings provide complementary insights into dominance effects. These findings provide valuable guidance for selecting dominance encodings in genetic analyses.

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
Animal Bioscience
Animal Bioscience AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
223
审稿时长
3 months
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信