본문 바로가기
KERD
논문

Comparison of accuracy of breeding value for cow from three methods in Hanwoo (Korean cattle) population

1

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류축산학

초록

In Korea, Korea Proven Bulls (KPN) program has been well-developed. Breeding and evaluation of cows are also an essential factor to increase earnings and genetic gain. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of cow breeding value by using three methods (pedigree index [PI], pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction [PBLUP], and genomic-BLUP [GBLUP]). The reference population (n = 16,971) was used to estimate breeding values for 481 females as a test population. The accuracy of GBLUP was 0.63, 0.66, 0.62 and 0.63 for carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), back-fat thickness (BFT), and marbling score (MS), respectively. As for the PBLUP method, accuracy of prediction was 0.43 for CWT, 0.45 for EMA, 0.43 for MS, and 0.44 for BFT. Accuracy of PI method was the lowest (0.28 to 0.29 for carcass traits). The increase by approximate 20% in accuracy of GBLUP method than other methods could be because genomic information may explain Mendelian sampling error that pedigree information cannot detect. Bias can cause reducing accuracy of estimated breeding value (EBV) for selected animals. Regression coefficient between true breeding value (TBV) and GBLUP EBV, PBLUP EBV, and PI EBV were 0.78, 0.625, and 0.35, respectively for CWT. This showed that genomic EBV (GEBV) is less biased than PBLUP and PI EBV in this study. In addition, number of effective chromosome segments (Me) statistic that indicates the independent loci is one of the important factors affecting the accuracy of BLUP. The correlation between Me and the accuracy of GBLUP is related to the genetic relationship between reference and test population. The correlations between Me and accuracy were −0.74 in CWT, −0.75 in EMA, −0.73 in MS, and −0.75 in BF, which were strongly negative. These results proved that the estimation of genetic ability using genomic data is the most effective, and the smaller the Me, the higher the accuracy of EBV.

Abstract

In Korea, Korea Proven Bulls (KPN) program has been well-developed. Breeding and evaluation of cows are also an essential factor to increase earnings and genetic gain. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of cow breeding value by using three methods (pedigree index [PI], pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction [PBLUP], and genomic-BLUP [GBLUP]). The reference population (n = 16,971) was used to estimate breeding values for 481 females as a test population. The accuracy of GBLUP was 0.63, 0.66, 0.62 and 0.63 for carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), back-fat thickness (BFT), and marbling score (MS), respectively. As for the PBLUP method, accuracy of prediction was 0.43 for CWT, 0.45 for EMA, 0.43 for MS, and 0.44 for BFT. Accuracy of PI method was the lowest (0.28 to 0.29 for carcass traits). The increase by approximate 20% in accuracy of GBLUP method than other methods could be because genomic information may explain Mendelian sampling error that pedigree information cannot detect. Bias can cause reducing accuracy of estimated breeding value (EBV) for selected animals. Regression coefficient between true breeding value (TBV) and GBLUP EBV, PBLUP EBV, and PI EBV were 0.78, 0.625, and 0.35, respectively for CWT. This showed that genomic EBV (GEBV) is less biased than PBLUP and PI EBV in this study. In addition, number of effective chromosome segments (Me) statistic that indicates the independent loci is one of the important factors affecting the accuracy of BLUP. The correlation between Me and the accuracy of GBLUP is related to the genetic relationship between reference and test population. The correlations between Me and accuracy were −0.74 in CWT, −0.75 in EMA, −0.73 in MS, and −0.75 in BF, which were strongly negative. These results proved that the estimation of genetic ability using genomic data is the most effective, and the smaller the Me, the higher the accuracy of EBV.

참고문헌 (37)

  1. Ki Yong Chung, "Current situation and future prospects for beef production in South Korea — A review", Animal Bioscience, 31(7), pp.951~960 (2018), 아세아·태평양축산학회[DOI]
  2. B. Park, "National Genetic Evaluation (System) of Hanwoo (Korean Native Cattle)", Animal Bioscience, 26(2), pp.151~156 (2013), 아세아·태평양축산학회[DOI]
  3. Peak BH, "Overview of beef cattle(Hanwoo)production in Korea", Proceedings of 2nd Korea-US-Japan International Joint Symposium (2007)
  4. Sun C, "Comparison between a sire model and an animal model for genetic evaluation of fertility traits in Danish Holstein population", J Dairy Sci, 92, pp.4063~4071 (2009)[DOI]
  5. Mehrban H, "Comparison of conventional BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP evaluations for yearling weight and carcass traits in Hanwoo beef cattle using single trait and multi-trait models", PLOS ONE, 14, pp.e0223352~ (2019)[DOI]
  6. Nwogwugwu Chiemela Peter, "Effect of errors in pedigree on the accuracy of estimated breeding value for carcass traits in Korean Hanwoo cattle", Animal Bioscience, 33(7), pp.1057~1067 (2020), 아세아·태평양축산학회[DOI]
  7. Henderson CR, "Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model", Biometrics, 31, pp.423~447 (1975)[DOI]
  8. Meuwissen THE, "Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps", Genetics, 157, pp.1819~1829 (2001)[DOI]
  9. Misztal I, "Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information", J Dairy Sci, 92, pp.4648~4655 (2009)[DOI]
  10. Chen L, "Accuracy of predicting genomic breeding values for residual feed intake in Angus and Charolais beef cattle", J Anim Sci, 91, pp.4669~4678 (2013)[DOI]
  11. Wolc A, "Breeding value prediction for production traits in layer chickens using pedigree or genomic relationships in a reduced animal model", Genet Sel Evol, 43, pp.5~ (2011)[DOI]
  12. Nwogwugwu Chiemela Peter, "Optimal population size to detect quantitative trait loci in Korean native chicken: a simulation study", Animal Bioscience, 35(4), pp.511~516 (2022), 아세아·태평양축산학회[DOI]
  13. Purcell S, "PLINK : a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses", Am J Hum Genet, 81, pp.559~575 (2007)[DOI]
  14. Oldenbroek K, "Textbook animal breeding: animal breeding and genetics for BSc students" (2014), Centre for Genetic Resources and Animal Breeding and Genomics Group, Wageningen University and Research Centre
  15. Misztal I, "BLUPF90 and related programs (BGF90)", Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Genetic Applied to Livestock Production (2002)
  16. Manual for BLUPF90family of programs, "Misztal I", University of Georgia, ~ (2014)
  17. Lee J, "Comparison of alternative approaches to single-trait genomic prediction using genotyped and non-genotyped Hanwoo beef cattle", Genet Sel Evol, 49, pp.2~ (2017)[DOI]
  18. VanRaden PM, "Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions", J Dairy Sci, 91, pp.4414~4423 (2008)[DOI]
  19. Marjanovic J, "Factors affecting accuracy of estimated effective number of chromosome segments for numerically small breeds", J Anim Breed Genet, 138, pp.151~160 (2021)[DOI]
  20. Goddard ME, "Using the genomic relationship matrix to predict the accuracy of genomic selection", J Anim Breed Genet, 128, pp.409~421 (2011)[DOI]
  21. Martini JWR, "Epistasis and covariance : how gene interaction translates into genomic relationship", Theor Appl Genet, 129, pp.963~976 (2016)[DOI]
  22. Jibrila I, "Investigating the impact of preselection on subsequent single-step genomic BLUP evaluation of preselected animals", Genet Sel Evol, 52, pp.42~ (2020)[DOI]
  23. Misztal I, "Approximation of prediction error variance in large-scale animal models", J Dairy Sci, 71, pp.27~32 (1988)[DOI]
  24. Harris B, "Approximate reliability of genetic evaluations under an animal model", J Dairy Sci, 81, pp.2723~2728 (1998)[DOI]
  25. Mrode R, "Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values" (2014), CABI
  26. Naserkheil M, "Improving the accuracy of genomic evaluation for linear body measurement traits using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction in Hanwoo beef cattle", BMC Genet, 21, pp.144~ (2020)[DOI]
  27. Kim EH, "Estimation of breeding value and accuracy using pedigree and genotype of Hanwoo cows(Korean cattle)", J Anim Breed Genet, 139, pp.281~291 (2022)[DOI]
  28. Bangera R, "Genomic predictions can accelerate selection for resistance against Piscirickettsia salmonis in Atlantic salmon(Salmo salar)", BMC Genomics, 18, pp.121~ (2017)[DOI]
  29. Clark SA, "The importance of information on relatives for the prediction of genomic breeding values and the implications for the makeup of reference data sets in livestock breeding schemes", Genet Sel Evol, 44, pp.4~ (2012)[DOI]
  30. Hayes BJ, "Increased accuracy of artificial selection by using the realized relationship matrix", Genet Res, 91, pp.47~60 (2009)[DOI]
  31. Habier D, "The impact of genetic relationship information on genome-assisted breeding values", Genetics, 177, pp.2389~2397 (2007)[DOI]
  32. Habier D, "The impact of genetic relationship information on genomic breeding values in German Holstein cattle", Genet Sel Evol, 42, pp.5~ (2010)[DOI]
  33. Daetwyler HD, "Inbreeding in genome-wide selection", J Anim Breed Genet, 124, pp.369~376 (2007)[DOI]
  34. Lee SH, "Estimation of genomic prediction accuracy from reference populations with varying degrees of relationship", PLOS ONE, 12, pp.e0189775~ (2017)[DOI]
  35. Zhang X, "Weighting strategies for single-step genomic BLUP : an iterative approach for accurate calculation of GEBV and GWAS", Front Genet, 7, pp.151~ (2016)[DOI]
  36. Daetwyler HD, "The impact of genetic architecture on genome-wide evaluation methods", Genetics, 185, pp.1021~1031 (2010)[DOI]
  37. Clark SA, "Different models of genetic variation and their effect on genomic evaluation", Genet Sel Evol, 43, pp.18~ (2011)[DOI]

관련 논문AI추천

Genomic selection through single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction improves the accuracy of evaluation in Hanwoo cattle김시동, 이성수, 이승환, Alam Mahboob, Park Byoungho, Park Mi Na아세아·태평양축산학회 · Animal Bioscience2020 · 제33권 제10호Comparison on genomic prediction using pedigree BLUP and single step GBLUP through the Hanwoo full-sib family이두호, 이승환, Kang Ho-Chan, Kim Eun-Ho, Kim Ji-Yeong, Lim Hyun-Tae, Myung Cheol-Hyun, Sun Du-Won아세아·태평양축산학회 · Animal Bioscience2023 · 제36권 제9호The study on estimated breeding value and accuracy for economic traits in Gyoungnam Hanwoo cow (Korean cattle)강호찬, 김은호, 선두원, 임현태, Doo Ho Lee, Hyeon Kwon Kim, Jae-Bong Lee, Seung Hwan Lee한국축산학회 · 한국축산학회지2020 · 제62권 제4호한우의 유전체 육종가의 정확도 추정김내수, 이승수, 이승환, 이중재, 조광현, 조용민, 최연호, 최유림, 최태정한국축산학회 · 한국축산학회지2013 · 제55권 제1호한우암소의 유전체육종가 추정 및 정확도 분석신은경, 윤두학, 이승환농업생명과학연구원 · 농업생명과학연구2018 · 제52권 제2호Comparison of genomic predictions for carcass and reproduction traits in Berkshire, Duroc and Yorkshire populations in Korea김유삼, 김종주, 이윤미, 정종현, 최태정, 최호성, Asif Iqbal, M. Zahagir Alam아세아·태평양축산학회 · Animal Bioscience2019 · 제32권 제11호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (15건)