Estimating genomic breeding values and detecting QTL using univariate and bivariate models

Genome-wide associations for fertility traits in Holstein-Friesian dairy cows using data from experimental research herds in four European countries

Genome-wide association studies for difficult-to-measure traits are generally limited by the sample population size with accurate phenotypic data. The objective of this study was to utilise data on primiparous Holstein-Friesian cows from experimental farms in Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Sweden to identify genomic regions associated with traditional measures of fertility, as well as a fertility phenotype derived from milk progesterone profiles. Traditional fertility measures investigated were days to first heat, days to first service, pregnancy rate to first service, number of services and calving interval (CI); post-partum interval to the commencement of luteal activity (CLA) was derived using routine milk progesterone assays. Phenotypic and genotypic data on 37 590 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were available for up to 1570 primiparous cows. Genetic parameters were estimated using linear animal models, and univariate and bivariate genome-wide association analyses were undertaken using Bayesian stochastic search variable selection performed using Gibbs sampling. Heritability estimates of the traditional fertility traits varied from 0.03 to 0.16; the heritability for CLA was 0.13. The posterior quantitative trait locus (QTL) probabilities, across the genome, for the traditional fertility measures were all <0.021. Posterior QTL probabilities of 0.060 and 0.045 were observed for CLA on SNPs each on chromosome 2 and chromosome 21, respectively, in the univariate analyses; these probabilities increased when CLA was included in the bivariate analyses with the traditional fertility traits. For example, in the bivariate analysis with CI, the posterior QTL probability of the two aforementioned SNPs were 0.662 and 0.123. Candidate genes in the vicinity of these SNPs are discussed. The results from this study suggest that the power of genome-wide association studies in cattle may be increased by sharing of data and also possibly by using physiological measures of the trait under investigation.

Makeup of the genetic correlation between milk production traits using genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism information

The correlated responses between traits may differ depending on the makeup of genetic covariances, and may differ from the predictions of polygenic covariances. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to investigate the makeup of the genetic covariances between the well-studied traits: milk yield, fat yield, protein yield, and their percentages in more detail. Phenotypic records of 1,737 heifers of research farms in 4 different countries were used after homogenizing and adjusting for management effects. All cows had a genotype for 37,590 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). A bayesian stochastic search variable selection model was used to estimate the SNP effects for each trait. About 0.5 to 1.0% of the SNP had a significant effect on 1 or more traits; however, the SNP without a significant effect explained most of the genetic variances and covariances of the traits. Single nucleotide polymorphism correlations differed from the polygenic correlations, but only 10 regions were found with an effect on multiple traits; in 1 of these regions the DGAT1 gene was previously reported with an effect on multiple traits. This region explained up to 41% of the variances of 4 traits and explained a major part of the correlation between fat yield and fat percentage and contributes to asymmetry in correlated response between fat yield and fat percentage. Overall, for the traits in this study, the infinitesimal model is expected to be sufficient for the estimation of the variances and covariances.

Genomic breeding value prediction and QTL mapping of QTLMAS2011 data using Bayesian and GBLUP methods

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to apply Bayesian and GBLUP methods to predict genomic breeding values (GEBV), map QTL positions and explore the genetic architecture of the trait simulated for the 15th QTL-MAS workshop.

METHODS

Three methods with models considering dominance and epistasis inheritances were used to fit the data: (i) BayesB with a proportion π = 0.995 of SNPs assumed to have no effect, (ii) BayesCπ, where π is considered as unknown, and (iii) GBLUP, which directly fits animal genetic effects using a genomic relationship matrix.

RESULTS

BayesB, BayesCπ and GBLUP with various fitted models detected 6, 5, and 4 out of 8 simulated QTL, respectively. All five additive QTL were detected by Bayesian methods. When two QTL were in either coupling or repulsion phase, GBLUP only detected one of them and missed the other. In addition, GBLUP yielded more false positives. One imprinted QTL was detected by BayesB and GBLUP despite that only additive gene action was assumed. This QTL was missed by BayesCπ. None of the methods found two simulated additive-by-additive epistatic QTL. Variance components estimation correctly detected no evidence for dominance gene-action. Bayesian methods predicted additive genetic merit more accurately than GBLUP, and similar accuracies were observed between BayesB and BayesCπ.

CONCLUSIONS

Bayesian methods and GBLUP mapped QTL to similar chromosome regions but Bayesian methods gave fewer false positives. Bayesian methods can be superior to GBLUP in GEBV prediction when genomic architecture is unknown.

Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. II: QTL analysis

Background

A quantitative and a binary trait for the 14^th QTLMAS 2010 workshop were simulated under a model which combined additive inheritance, epistasis and imprinting. This paper aimed to compare results submitted by the participants of the workshop.

Methods

The results were compared according to three criteria: the success rate (ratio of mapped QTL to the total number of simulated QTL), and the error rate (ratio of false positives to the number of reported positions), and mean distance between a true mapped QTL and the nearest submitted position.

Results

Seven groups submitted results for the quantitative trait and five for the binary trait. Among the 37 simulated QTL 17 remained undetected. Success rate ranged from 0.05 to 0.43, error rate was between 0.00 and 0.92, and the mean distance ranged from 0.26 to 0.77 Mb.

Conclusions

Our comparison shows that differences among methods used by the participants increases with the complexity of genetic architecture. It was particularly visible for the quantitative trait which was determined partly by non-additive QTL. Furthermore, an imprinted QTL with a large effect may remain undetected if the applied model tests only for Mendelian genes.

Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection

BACKGROUND

For the XIV QTLMAS workshop, a dataset for traits with complex genetic architecture has been simulated and released for analyses by participants. One of the tasks was to estimate direct genomic values for individuals without phenotypes. The aim of this paper was to compare results of different approaches used by the participants to calculate direct genomic values for quantitative trait (QT) and binary trait (BT).

RESULTS

Participants applied 26 approaches for QT and 15 approaches for BT. Accuracy for QT was between 0.26 and 0.89 for males and between 0.31 and 0.89 for females, and for BT ranged from 0.27 to 0.85. For QT, percentage of lost response to selection varied from 8% to 83%, whereas for BT the loss was between 15% and 71%.

CONCLUSIONS

Bayesian model averaging methods predicted breeding values slightly better than GBLUP in a simulated data set. The methods utilizing genomic information performed better than traditional pedigree based BLUP analyses. Bivariate analyses was slightly advantageous over single trait for the same method. None of the methods estimated the non-additivity of QTL affecting the QT, which may be one of the constrains in accuracy observed in real data.