Search

Abstract 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 compare the accuracies of genomic prediction for milk yield, fat yield, and protein yield from Philippine dairy buffaloes using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) with the accuracies based on pedigree BLUP (pBLUP). To also assess the bias of the prediction, the regression coefficient (slope) of the adjusted phenotypes on the predicted breeding values (BVs) was also calculated. Two data sets were analyzed. The GENO data consisting of all female buffaloes that have both phenotypes and genotypes (n = 904 with 1,773,305-days lactation records) were analyzed using pBLUP and GBLUP. The ALL data, consisting of the GENO data plus females with phenotypes but not genotyped (n = 1,975 with 3,821,305-days lactation records), were analyzed using pBLUP and ssGBLUP. Animals were genotyped with the Affymetrix 90k buffalo genotyping array. After quality control, 60,827 single-nucleotide polymorphisms were used for downward analysis. A pedigree file containing 2,642 animals was used for pBLUP and ssGBLUP. Accuracy of prediction was calculated as the correlation between the predicted BVs of the test set and adjusted phenotypes, which were corrected for fixed effects, divided by the square root of the heritability of the trait, corrected for the number of lactations used in the test set. To assess the bias of the prediction, the regression coefficient (slope) of the adjusted phenotypes on the predicted BVs was also calculated. Results showed that genomic methods (GBLUP and ssGBLUP) provide more accurate predictions compared to pBLUP. Average GBLUP and ssGBLUP accuracies were 0.24 and 0.29, respectively, whereas average pBLUP accuracies (for GENO and ALL data) were 0.21 and 0.22, respectively. Slopes of the two genomic methods were also closer to one, indicating lesser bias, compared to pBLUP. Average GBLUP and ssGBLUP slopes were 0.89 and 0.84, respectively, whereas the average pBLUP (for GENO and ALL data) slopes were 0.80 and 0.54, respectively.