Search

Inbreeding depression, which refers to reduced fitness among offspring of related parents, has traditionally been studied using pedigrees. In practice, pedigree information is difficult to obtain, potentially unreliable, and rarely assessed for inbreeding arising from common ancestors who lived more than a few generations ago. Recently, there has been excitement about using SNP data to estimate inbreeding (F) arising from distant common ancestors in apparently "outbred" populations. Statistical power to detect inbreeding depression using SNP data depends on the actual variation in inbreeding in a population, the accuracy of detecting that with marker data, the effect size, and the sample size. No one has yet investigated what variation in F is expected in SNP data as a function of population size, and it is unclear which estimate of F is optimal for detecting inbreeding depression. In the present study, we use theory, simulated genetic data, and real genetic data to find the optimal estimate of F, to quantify the likely variation in F in populations of various sizes, and to estimate the power to detect inbreeding depression. We find that F estimated from runs of homozygosity (Froh), which reflects shared ancestry of genetic haplotypes, retains variation in even large populations (e.g., SD = 0.5% when Ne = 10,000) and is likely to be the most powerful method of detecting inbreeding effects from among several alternative estimates of F. However, large samples (e.g., 12,000-65,000) will be required to detect inbreeding depression for likely effect sizes, and so studies using Froh to date have probably been underpowered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this Review, we focus on the similarity of the concepts underlying prediction of estimated breeding values (EBVs) in livestock and polygenic risk scores (PRS) in humans. Our research spans both fields and so we recognize factors that are very obvious for those in one field, but less so for those in the other. Differences in family size between species is the wedge that drives the different viewpoints and approaches. Large family size achievable in nonhuman species accompanied by selection generates a smaller effective population size, increased linkage disequilibrium and a higher average genetic relationship between individuals within a population. In human genetic analyses, we select individuals unrelated in the classical sense (coefficient of relationship ,0.05) to estimate heritability captured by common SNPs. In livestock data, all animals within a breed are to some extent "related," and so it is not possible to select unrelated individuals and retain a data set of sufficient size to analyze. These differences directly or indirectly impact the way data analyses are undertaken. In livestock, genetic segregation variance exposed through samplings of parental genomes within families is directly observable and taken for granted. In humans, this genomic variation is under-recognized for its contribution to variation in polygenic risk of common disease, in both those with and without family history of disease. We explore the equation that predicts the expected proportion of variance explained using PRS, and quantify how GWAS sample size is the key factor for maximizing accuracy of prediction in both humans and livestock. Last, we bring together the concepts discussed to address some frequently asked questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]