29.8.2011EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Estimation of genomic breeding values for traits with high and low heritability in Brown Swiss bulls M. Kramer 1, F. Biscarini.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reliable genomic evaluations across breeds and borders Sander de Roos CRV, the Netherlands.
Advertisements

2007 Paul VanRaden, Mel Tooker, and Nicolas Gengler Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD, USA, and Gembloux Agricultural U., Belgium
Aaron Lorenz Department of Agronomy and Horticulture
Added value of whole-genome sequence data to genomic predictions in dairy cattle Rianne van Binsbergen 1,2, Mario Calus 1, Chris Schrooten 3, Fred van.
Relationship of somatic cell score with fertility measures Poster 1390 ADSA 2001, Indiannapolis R. H. Miller 1, J. S. Clay 2, and H. D. Norman 1 1 Animal.
Perspectives from Human Studies and Low Density Chip Jeffrey R. O’Connell University of Maryland School of Medicine October 28, 2008.
G.R. Wiggans 1, T.S. Sonstegard 1, P.M. VanRaden 1, L.K. Matukumalli 1,2, R.D. Schnabel 3, J.F. Taylor 3, J.P. Chesnais 4, F.S. Schenkel 5, and C.P. Van.
Wiggans, 2013RL meeting, Aug. 15 (1) Dr. George R. Wiggans, Acting Research Leader Bldg. 005, Room 306, BARC-West (main office);
How Genomics is changing Business and Services of Associations Dr. Josef Pott, Weser-Ems-Union eG, Germany.
What’s coming next in genomics? Ben Hayes, Department of Primary Industries, Victoria, Australia.
Extension of Bayesian procedures to integrate and to blend multiple external information into genetic evaluations J. Vandenplas 1,2, N. Gengler 1 1 University.
Mating Programs Including Genomic Relationships and Dominance Effects
Mating Programs Including Genomic Relationships and Dominance Effects Chuanyu Sun 1, Paul M. VanRaden 2, Jeff R. O'Connell 3 1 National Association of.
Impacts of inclusion of foreign data in genomic evaluation of dairy cattle K. M. Olson 1, P. M. VanRaden 2, D. J. Null 2, and M. E. Tooker 2 1 National.
2007 J. B. Cole 1,*, P. M. VanRaden 1, J. R. O'Connell 3, C. P. Van Tassell 1,2, T. S. Sonstegard 2, R. D. Schnabel 4, J. F. Taylor 4, and G. R. Wiggans.
George R. Wiggans Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD National Association.
2007 Paul VanRaden, Curt Van Tassell, George Wiggans, Tad Sonstegard, and Jeff O’Connell Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory and Bovine Functional Genomics.
Wiggans, th WCGALP (1) G.R. Wiggans*, T.A. Cooper, D.J. Null, and P.M. VanRaden Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory Agricultural Research.
An Efficient Method of Generating Whole Genome Sequence for Thousands of Bulls Chuanyu Sun 1 and Paul M. VanRaden 2 1 National Association of Animal Breeders,
Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD 2013 Paul VanRaden University.
Bovine Genomics The Technology and its Applications Gerrit Kistemaker Chief Geneticist, Canadian Dairy Network (CDN) Many slides were created by.
2007 Paul VanRaden and Mel Tooker Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA
2007 Paul VanRaden, George Wiggans, Jeff O’Connell, John Cole, Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Tad Sonstegard, and Curt Van Tassell Bovine Functional.
Genetic Evaluation of Lactation Persistency Estimated by Best Prediction for Ayrshire, Brown Swiss, Guernsey, and Milking Shorthorn Dairy Cattle J. B.
Adjustment of selection index coefficients and polygenic variance to improve regressions and reliability of genomic evaluations P. M. VanRaden, J. R. Wright*,
2007 Paul VanRaden and Jan Wright Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD 2013 Measuring genomic pre-selection in theory.
J. B. Cole * and P. M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD
2007 Melvin Tooker Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA
John B. Cole Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD Best prediction.
G.R. Wiggans* and P.M. VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA Beltsville, MD
J. B. Cole 1,*, P. M. VanRaden 1, and C. M. B. Dematawewa 2 1 Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,
Gilles Charmet1*, Van Giang Tran1, Delphine Ly1 ,Jerome Auzanneau2
J. B. Cole *, G. R. Wiggans, P. M. VanRaden, and R. H. Miller Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville,
2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA
P. M. VanRaden and T. A. Cooper * Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA
April 2010 (1) Prediction of Breed Composition & Multibreed Genomic Evaluations K. M. Olson and P. M. VanRaden.
2007 Paul VanRaden 1, Jeff O’Connell 2, George Wiggans 1, Kent Weigel 3 1 Animal Improvement Programs Lab, USDA, Beltsville, MD, USA 2 University of Maryland.
2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Lab, Beltsville, MD Iterative combination of national phenotype, genotype, pedigree,
Multi-trait, multi-breed conception rate evaluations P. M. VanRaden 1, J. R. Wright 1 *, C. Sun 2, J. L. Hutchison 1 and M. E. Tooker 1 1 Animal Genomics.
Multibreed Genomic Evaluation Using Purebred Dairy Cattle K. M. Olson* 1 and P. M. VanRaden 2 1 Department of Dairy Science Virginia Polytechnic and State.
VISG – LARGE DATASETS Literature Review Introduction – Genome Wide Selection Aka Genomic Selection Set of Markers 10,000’s - enough to capture most genetic.
H.D. Norman* J.R. Wright, P.M. VanRaden, and M.T. Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory Agricultural.
2007 John Cole, Paul VanRaden, George Wiggans, and Melvin Kuhn Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD,
2007 Paul VanRaden Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, USA 2008 New.
2007 Paul VanRaden 1, Curt Van Tassell 2, George Wiggans 1, Tad Sonstegard 2, Bob Schnabel 3, Jerry Taylor 3, and Flavio Schenkel 4, Paul VanRaden 1, Curt.
Strategies to Incorporate Genomic Prediction Into Population-Wide Genetic Evaluations Nicolas Gengler 1,2 & Paul VanRaden 3 1 Animal Science.
Sequencing Brown Swiss Cattle: GWAS and Genomic Prediction based on sequence data Mirjam Frischknecht World Brown Swiss Congress, Mende Von.
I. Statistical Methods for Genome-Enabled Prediction of Complex Traits OUTLINE THE CHALLENGES OF PREDICTING COMPLEX TRAITS ORDINARY LEAST SQUARES (OLS)
Using a MQTL matrix to test for pleiotropic effects of Mendelian trait loci on quantitative traits. C. Scheper1. S. König1   1Institute of Animal Breeding.
Complex Genomic Trait Predictions to Accelerate Plant Breeding Programs Kelci Miclaus1, Luciano da Costa e Silva1 , and Lauro Jose Moreira Guimaraes2.
Washington State University
The effect of using sequence data instead of a lower density SNP chip on a GWAS EAAP 2017; Tallinn, Estonia Sanne van den Berg, Roel Veerkamp, Fred van.
Drivers of Dairy Genetics Research
S. Naderi1, R. R. Mota1, S. Vanderick1, N. Gengler1
Distribution and Location of Genetic Effects for Dairy Traits
Methods to compute reliabilities for genomic predictions of feed intake Paul VanRaden, Jana Hutchison, Bingjie Li, Erin Connor, and John Cole USDA, Agricultural.
Faculty of Agriculture and Nutritional Science
Washington State University
BayesAS and GBLUP models
S. Vanderick1,2, F.G. Colinet1, A. Mineur1, R.R Mota1,
A National Sire Fertility Index
Predictions of Breed Composition Using Holsteins, Jersey, and Brown Swiss Genotypes K. M. Olson and P. M. VanRaden.
Can you believe those genomic evaluations for young bulls?
Perspectives from Human Studies and Low Density Chip
Increased reliability of genetic evaluations for dairy cattle in the United States from use of genomic information Abstr.
Using Haplotypes in Breeding Programs
Title of the presentation: Methods and Data Analysis
Development of Genomic GMACE
The Basic Genetic Model
Presentation transcript:

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Estimation of genomic breeding values for traits with high and low heritability in Brown Swiss bulls M. Kramer 1, F. Biscarini 1, B. Bapst 2, C. Stricker 3, H. Simianer 1 1 Department of Animal Sciences, Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Germany 2 QUALITAS AG, Zug, Switzerland 3 agn Genetics GmbH, Davos, Switzerland

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Outline Introduction, aim of the study Material and methods –Data, Filtering, imputing –Different G matrices Results –logL with different G matrices –Accuracy of gEBVs with different G matrices Conclusions 2

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Introduction GBLUP is a common approach for estimation of genomic breeding values (gEBVs) –Regression on SNP effects –Use of genomic relationship matrix (G matrix) 3

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Introduction GBLUP is a common approach for estimation of genomic breeding values (gEBVs) –Regression on SNP effects –Use of genomic relationship matrix (G matrix) Several methods are well known in animal breeding for setting up G matrices from SNP data –Hayes and Goddard (2008) –Van Raden (2008) 3

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Aim of the Study The method of Astle and Balding (2009) has not been applied to animal breeding so far 4

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Aim of the Study The method of Astle and Balding (2009) has not been applied to animal breeding so far ⇒Comparison of G matrix by Astle and Balding (2009) to widely used algorithms 4

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Aim of the Study The method of Astle and Balding (2009) has not been applied to animal breeding so far ⇒Comparison of G matrix by Astle and Balding (2009) to widely used algorithms →logL as a measurement of how well the model fits the data 4

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Aim of the Study The method of Astle and Balding (2009) has not been applied to animal breeding so far ⇒Comparison of G matrix by Astle and Balding (2009) to widely used algorithms →logL as a measurement of how well the model fits the data →Accuracy of gEBVs form different G matrices compared by cross validation 4

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Material 1,138 Brown Swiss bulls 54,001 SNP genotypes (Illumina 54k SNP Chip) Conventional EBVs (April 2010): –Milk yield (MY) –Somatic cell score (SCS) –Non-return rate (NRR) –Interval from calving to first insemination (CFI) 5

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Filtering and imputation Elimination of SNP markers: –Unknown position –Callrate < 95% –MAF < 5% ⇒34,474 SNP used for analysis Imputing with BEAGLE 3.2 (Browning and Browning, 2009) 6

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Statistical model GBLUP in ASReml: y vector of EBVs 7

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Cross validation 5 fold cross validation with 10 replicates Random distribution of animals to validation and calibration set →All accuracies are means of 50 replicates Calculation of accuracy (Legarra et al. 2008): 8

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Different G matrices Hayes and Goddard (2008): Where S xy is the average similarity index (Eding and Meuwissen, 2001) over all loci 9

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Different G matrices Van Raden (2008): Astle and Balding (2009): 10

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Different G matrices Van Raden (2008): Astle and Balding (2009): 10 relationship kinship

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Different G matrices Van Raden (2008): Astle and Balding (2009): 10 Average over all loci Each locus individually

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Different G matrices Van Raden (2008): Astle and Balding (2009): 10 Average over all loci Each locus individually

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Results -logL of the model G matrixlogL MYlogL SCSlogL NRRlogL CFI Astle & Balding VanRaden Hayes & Goddard

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Results -accuracy of gEBVs 12

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Conclusion G matirx by Astle and Balding can be used to estimate gEBVs 13

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Conclusion G matirx by Astle and Balding can be used to estimate gEBVs G matrix by Astle and Balding delivers higher logL than G matrix by VanRaden or G Matrix by Hayes and Goddard →Fitting of the model with G matrix by Astle and Balding is the best 13

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Conclusion G matirx by Astle and Balding can be used to estimate gEBVs. G matrix by Astle and Balding delivers higher logL than G matrix by VanRaden or G Matrix by Hayes and Goddard →Fitting of the model with G matrix by Astle and Balding is the best Accuracies of gEBVs are equivalent with all three G matrices 13

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Acknowledgement The authors gratefully acknowledge co-funding from the European Commission, under the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development, for the Collaborative Project LowInputBreeds (Grant agreement No ). However, the views expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission, nor do they in any way anticipate the Commission’s future policy in this area. 14

EAAP Meeting, Stavanger Thanks for Your attention!