Application of single-step genomic evaluation for crossbred performance in pig.

Crossbreding is predominant and intensively used in commercial meat production systems, especially in poultry and swine. Genomic evaluation has been successfully applied for breeding within purebreds but also offers opportunities of selecting purebreds for crossbred performance by combining information from purebreds with information from crossbreds. However, it generally requires that all relevant animals are genotyped, which is costly and presently does not seem to be feasible in practice. Recently, a novel single-step BLUP method for genomic evaluation of both purebred and crossbred performance has been developed that can incorporate marker genotypes into a traditional animal model. This new method has not been validated in real data sets. In this study, we applied this single-step method to analyze data for the maternal trait of total number of piglets born in Danish Landrace, Yorkshire, and two-way crossbred pigs in different scenarios. The genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performances was investigated first, and then the impact of (crossbred) genomic information on prediction reliability for crossbred performance was explored. The results confirm the existence of a moderate genetic correlation, and it was seen that the standard errors on the estimates were reduced when including genomic information. Models with marker information, especially crossbred genomic information, improved model-based reliabilities for crossbred performance of purebred boars and also improved the predictive ability for crossbred animals and, to some extent, reduced the bias of prediction. We conclude that the new single-step BLUP method is a good tool in the genetic evaluation for crossbred performance in purebred animals.

[1]  R. Fernando,et al.  Genetic evaluation by BLUP in two-breed terminal crossbreeding systems under dominance. , 1997, Journal of animal science.

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

[3]  J. Werf,et al.  Maximizing genetic response in crossbreds using both purebred and crossbred information , 1994 .

[4]  H. H. Timm,et al.  Genetic parameter estimates from joint evaluation of purebreds and crossbreds in swine using the crossbred model. , 2001, Journal of animal science.

[5]  P Madsen,et al.  Single-step methods for genomic evaluation in pigs. , 2012, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[6]  R. Collier,et al.  Environmental physiology of livestock. , 2012 .

[7]  L. A. García-Cortés,et al.  Multibreed analysis by splitting the breeding values , 2006, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[8]  J. Fulton Genomic selection for poultry breeding , 2012 .

[9]  M. Lund,et al.  Genomic prediction for Nordic Red Cattle using one-step and selection index blending. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[10]  A. C. Sørensen,et al.  Maximizing crossbred performance through purebred genomic selection , 2014, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[11]  P. Bijma,et al.  Accuracies of estimated breeding values from ordinary genetic evaluations do not reflect the correlation between true and estimated breeding values in selected populations. , 2012, Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie.

[12]  R. Fernando,et al.  Covariance between relatives in multibreed populations: additive model , 1993, Theoretical and Applied Genetics.

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

[14]  F. Pirchner,et al.  Genetic parameters of cross‐ and purebred poultry , 1973 .

[15]  Ignacy Misztal,et al.  Accuracy of estimated breeding values with genomic information on males, females, or both: an example on broiler chicken , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[16]  D. Falconer A note on Fisher's 'average effect' and 'average excess'. , 1985, Genetical research.

[17]  J. Bastiaansen,et al.  Standard error of the genetic correlation: how much data do we need to estimate a purebred-crossbred genetic correlation? , 2014, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[18]  P. Ma,et al.  Imputation of genotypes in Danish purebred and two-way crossbred pigs using low-density panels , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[19]  Sharon R. Browning,et al.  Missing data imputation and haplotype phase inference for genome-wide association studies , 2008, Human Genetics.

[20]  P. VanRaden,et al.  Invited review: reliability of genomic predictions for North American Holstein bulls. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[21]  Denis Milan,et al.  Design of a High Density SNP Genotyping Assay in the Pig Using SNPs Identified and Characterized by Next Generation Sequencing Technology , 2009, PloS one.

[22]  C. Spearman The proof and measurement of association between two things. , 2015, International journal of epidemiology.

[23]  Raphael Mrode,et al.  Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values , 1996 .

[24]  R. Fernando,et al.  Genomic selection of purebred animals for crossbred performance in the presence of dominant gene action , 2013, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[25]  M. Lund,et al.  Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped , 2010, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[26]  M. Lund,et al.  Improving genetic evaluation of litter size and piglet mortality for both genotyped and nongenotyped individuals using a single-step method. , 2015, Journal of animal science.

[27]  J. Dürr,et al.  Interbull survey on the use of genomic information , 2009 .

[28]  Bootstrap study of genome-enabled prediction reliabilities using haplotype blocks across Nordic Red cattle breeds. , 2015, Journal of dairy science.

[29]  W. J. Boylan,et al.  Purebred versus crossbred performance as a basis of selection in swine. , 1971, Journal of animal science.

[30]  R. Fernando,et al.  Genomic selection of purebreds for crossbred performance , 2009, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[31]  J. Dekkers,et al.  Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance. , 2007, Journal of animal science.

[32]  N. Gengler,et al.  Using test station and on-farm data for the genetic evaluation of Pietrain boars used on Landrace sows for growth performance. , 2011, Journal of animal science.

[33]  M. Koivula,et al.  GEBV Validation Test Revisited , 2012 .

[34]  J. V. D. van der Werf,et al.  Genetic correlation and heritabilities for purebred and crossbred performance in poultry egg production traits. , 1995, Journal of animal science.

[35]  Guosheng Su,et al.  Comparison on genomic predictions using three GBLUP methods and two single-step blending methods in the Nordic Holstein population , 2012, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[36]  M. Wei Combined crossbred and purebred selection in animal breeding , 1992 .