Studies on inflation of GEBV in single-step GBLUP for type

The purpose of this study was to evaluate sources of inflation of GEBV in single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) evaluations. Tests involved 10 102 702 records of 18 type traits from 6 930 618 Holstein cows. A total of 576k animals with genotypes were used in the analyses and included 23 174 sires, 27 215 cows and 49 611 young animals. The genomic relationship matrix ( G ) was scaled for compatibility with the pedigree matrix for genotyped animals ( A 22 ). Genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) using phenotypes up to 2010 or up to 2014 were calculated considering a) inbreeding in A 22 but not in A, 2) inbreeding in both A and A 22 , 3) as previously but considering nonzero inbreeding of phantom parents, and 4) as previously but reducing the additive variance by one half. Reliabilities (R 2 ) and regression factors (b 1 ) were derived based on DYD2014 and GEBV2010 of 1711 sires with at least 50 daughters in 2014 but no daughters in 2010. For cases 1 to 4, the reliabilities were 0.48, 0.49, 0.49, and 0.50, respectively. The average regressions were 0.75, 0.85, 0.90, and 0.96, respectively. The b 1 factors could be close to 1 by multiplying G -1 - A 22 -1 by lambda and by multiplying A 22 -1 by omega. The optimal omega was 0.7 for case 1) and 0.9 for case 2). Both parameters are shown to account for ignored inbreeding in A. Inflation of GEBV in ssGBLUP can be eliminated by considering inbreeding in A, correction factors, and by reducing the additive variance. A comprehensive theory extending unknown parent groups to metafounders may automatically eliminate inflation of GEBV for arbitrarily complex populations including multibreed.

[1]  I Misztal,et al.  A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[2]  I. Misztal,et al.  Crossbreed evaluations in single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor using adjusted realized relationship matrices. , 2016, Journal of animal science.

[3]  N Gengler,et al.  A simple method to approximate gene content in large pedigree populations: application to the myostatin gene in dual-purpose Belgian Blue cattle. , 2007, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[4]  I Misztal,et al.  Short communication: genomic evaluations of final score for US Holsteins benefit from the inclusion of genotypes on cows. , 2013, Journal of dairy science.

[5]  R. L. Quaas,et al.  Genetic Groups in an Animal Model , 1988 .

[6]  Ignacy Misztal,et al.  Ancestral Relationships Using Metafounders: Finite Ancestral Populations and Across Population Relationships , 2015, Genetics.

[7]  B. Harris,et al.  Large-Scale Single-Step Genomic Evaluation for Milk Production Traits , 2012 .

[8]  I. Misztal,et al.  Technical note: Impact of pedigree depth on convergence of single-step genomic BLUP in a purebred swine population. , 2017, Journal of animal science.

[9]  A Legarra,et al.  Technical note: Genomic evaluation for crossbred performance in a single-step approach with metafounders. , 2017, Journal of animal science.

[10]  Paul M. VanRaden,et al.  Technical note: adjustment of all cow evaluations for yield traits to be comparable with bull evaluations. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[11]  A. Legarra,et al.  A unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree and genomic information for a genetic evaluation of Holstein final score , 2009 .

[12]  Ignacy Misztal,et al.  Inbreeding in populations with incomplete pedigrees , 1999 .

[13]  P. VanRaden,et al.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. , 2008, Journal of dairy science.

[14]  Ignacy Misztal,et al.  Metafounders are related to Fst fixation indices and reduce bias in single-step genomic evaluations , 2017, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[15]  Guosheng Su,et al.  Genomic evaluation of both purebred and crossbred performances , 2014, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[16]  P. VanRaden,et al.  Accounting for Inbreeding and Crossbreeding in Genetic Evaluation of Large Populations , 1992 .

[17]  I Misztal,et al.  Differing genetic trend estimates from traditional and genomic evaluations of genotyped animals as evidence of preselection bias in US Holsteins. , 2018, Journal of dairy science.