Search

The aim of this study was to find significant genomic regions associated with carcass traits in Hanwoo cattle and to compare the benefit of using additional information from non-genotyped animals. Imputed whole-genome sequence data were used along with phenotypic data on 13 715 genotyped animals as well as phenotypes of 440 284 non-genotyped animals that were offspring of 454 genotyped sires. For carcass weight, 15 083 SNPs in 33 QTL regions and 313 candidate genes were identified. We found 410 SNPs in 17 QTL regions containing 122 candidate genes for back fat thickness. In total, 656 SNPs in 19 QTLs with 137 candidate genes for eye muscle area and 79 SNPs in 12 QTL regions with 77 candidate genes were identified for marbling score. The most important candidate genes included ZFAT, TG, PLAG1, CHCHD7, and TOX for carcass weight and eye muscle area, NOG for back fat thickness, and EVOVL5 for marbling score. This study showed that the use of phenotypic records on non-genotyped progeny along with imputed whole-genome sequence data increased the power of detecting new significant genomic regions.

Background Selection of livestock based on their robustness or sensitivity to environmental variation could help improve the efficiency of production systems, particularly in the light of climate change. Genetic variation in robustness arises from genotype-by-environment (G × E) interactions, with genotypes performing differently when animals are raised in contrasted environments. Understanding the nature of this genetic variation is essential to implement strategies to improve robustness. In this study, our aim was to explore the genetics of robustness in Australian sheep to different growth environments using linear reaction norm models (RNM), with post-weaning weight records of 22,513 lambs and 60 k single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). The use of scale-corrected genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) for the slope to account for scale-type G × E interactions was also investigated. Results Additive genetic variance was observed for the slope of the RNM, with genetic correlations between low- and high-growth environments indicating substantial re-ranking of genotypes (0.44–0.49). The genetic variance increased from low- to high-growth environments. The heritability of post-weaning body weight ranged from 0.28 to 0.39. The genetic correlation between intercept and slope of the reaction norm for post-weaning body weight was low to moderate when based on the estimated (co)variance components but was much higher when based on back-solved SNP effects. An initial analysis suggested that a region on chromosome 11 affected both the intercept and the slope, but when the GEBV for the slope were conditioned on the GEBV for the intercept to remove the effect of scale-type G × E interactions on SNP effects for robustness, a single genomic region on chromosome 7 was found to be associated with robustness. This region included genes previously associated with growth traits and disease susceptibility in livestock. Conclusions This study shows a significant genetic variation in the slope of RNM that could be used for selecting for increased robustness of sheep. Both scale-type and rank-type G × E interactions contributed to variation in the slope. The correction for scale effects of GEBV for the slope should be considered when analysing robustness using RNM. Overall, robustness appears to be a highly polygenic trait.

The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of genomic prediction of body weight and eating quality traits in a numerically small sheep population (Dorper sheep). Prediction was based on a large multi-breed/admixed reference population and using (a) 50k or 500k single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes, (b) imputed whole-genome sequencing data (~31 million), (c) selected SNPs from whole genome sequence data and (d) 50k SNP genotypes plus selected SNPs from whole-genome sequence data. Furthermore, the impact of using a breed-adjusted genomic relationship matrix on accuracy of genomic breeding value was assessed. The selection of genetic variants was based on an association study performed on imputed whole-genome sequence data in an independent population, which was chosen either randomly from the base population or according to higher genetic proximity to the target population. Genomic prediction was based on genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), and the accuracy of genomic prediction was assessed according to the correlation between genomic breeding value and corrected phenotypes divided by the square root of trait heritability. The accuracy of genomic prediction was between 0.20 and 0.30 across different traits based on common 50k SNP genotypes, which improved on average by 0.06 (absolute value) on average based on using prioritized genetic markers from whole-genome sequence data. Using prioritized genetic markers from a genetically more related GWAS population resulted in slightly higher prediction accuracy (0.02 absolute value) compared to genetic markers derived from a random GWAS population. Using high-density SNP genotypes or imputed whole-genome sequence data in GBLUP showed almost no improvement in genomic prediction accuracy however, accounting for different marker allele frequencies in reference population according to a breed-adjusted GRM resulted to on average 0.024 (absolute value) increase in accuracy of genomic prediction.

The objectives of this study were to estimate the additive and dominance variance component of several weight and ultrasound scanned body composition traits in purebred and combined cross-bred sheep populations based on single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) marker genotypes and then to investigate the effect of fitting additive and dominance effects on accuracy of genomic evaluation. Additive and dominance variance components were estimated in a mixed model equation based on "average information restricted maximum likelihood" using additive and dominance (co)variances between animals calculated from 48,599 SNP marker genotypes. Genomic prediction was based on genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), and the accuracy of prediction was assessed based on a random 10-fold cross-validation. Across different weight and scanned body composition traits, dominance variance ranged from 0.0% to 7.3% of the phenotypic variance in the purebred population and from 7.1% to 19.2% in the combined cross-bred population. In the combined cross-bred population, the range of dominance variance decreased to 3.1% and 9.9% after accounting for heterosis effects. Accounting for dominance effects significantly improved the likelihood of the fitting model in the combined cross-bred population. This study showed a substantial dominance genetic variance for weight and ultrasound scanned body composition traits particularly in cross-bred population; however, improvement in the accuracy of genomic breeding values was small and statistically not significant. Dominance variance estimates in combined cross-bred population could be overestimated if heterosis is not fitted in the model.

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 aSingle‐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. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

International audience; AbstractBackground Genomic prediction using high-density (HD) marker genotypes is expected to lead to higher prediction accuracy, particularly for more heterogeneous multi-breed and crossbred populations such as those in sheep and beef cattle, due to providing stronger linkage disequilibrium between single nucleotide polymorphisms and quantitative trait loci controlling a trait. The objective of this study was to evaluate a possible improvement in genomic prediction accuracy of production traits in Australian sheep breeds based on HD genotypes (600k, both observed and imputed) compared to prediction based on 50k marker genotypes. In particular, we compared improvement in prediction accuracy of animals that are more distantly related to the reference population and across sheep breeds.MethodsGenomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and a Bayesian approach (BayesR) were used as prediction methods using whole or subsets of a large multi-breed/crossbred sheep reference set. Empirical prediction accuracy was evaluated for purebred Merino, Border Leicester, Poll Dorset and White Suffolk sire breeds according to the Pearson correlation coefficient between genomic estimated breeding values and breeding values estimated based on a progeny test in a separate dataset.ResultsResults showed a small absolute improvement (0.0 to 8.0% and on average 2.2% across all traits) in prediction accuracy of purebred animals from HD genotypes when prediction was based on the whole dataset. Greater improvement in prediction accuracy (1.0 to 12.0% and on average 5.2%) was observed for animals that were genetically lowly related to the reference set while it ranged from 0.0 to 5.0% for across-breed prediction. On average, no significant advantage was observed with BayesR compared to GBLUP.

International audience; Background The accuracy of genomic prediction depends largely on the number of animals with phenotypes and genotypes. In some industries, such as sheep and beef cattle, data are often available from a mixture of breeds, multiple strains within a breed or from crossbred animals. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of genomic prediction for several economically important traits in sheep when using data from purebreds, crossbreds or a combination of those in a reference population.MethodsThe reference populations were purebred Merinos, crossbreds of Border Leicester (BL), Poll Dorset (PD) or White Suffolk (WS) with Merinos and combinations of purebred and crossbred animals. Genomic breeding values (GBV) were calculated based on genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), using a genomic relationship matrix calculated based on 48 599 Ovine SNP (single nucleotide polymorphisms) genotypes. The accuracy of GBV was assessed in a group of purebred industry sires based on the correlation coefficient between GBV and accurate estimated breeding values based on progeny records.ResultsThe accuracy of GBV for Merino sires increased with a larger purebred Merino reference population, but decreased when a large purebred Merino reference population was augmented with records from crossbred animals. The GBV accuracy for BL, PD and WS breeds based on crossbred data was the same or tended to decrease when more purebred Merinos were added to the crossbred reference population. The prediction accuracy for a particular breed was close to zero when the reference population did not contain any haplotypes of the target breed, except for some low accuracies that were obtained when predicting PD from WS and vice versa.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that crossbred animals can be used for genomic prediction of purebred animals using 50 k SNP marker density and GBLUP, but crossbred data provided lower accuracy than purebred data. Including data from distant breeds in a reference population had a neutral to slightly negative effect on the accuracy of genomic prediction. Accounting for differences in marker allele frequencies between breeds had only a small effect on the accuracy of genomic prediction from crossbred or combined crossbred and purebred reference populations.