Improving Genomic Prediction for Seed Quality Traits in Oat (Avena sativa L.) Using Trait-Specific Relationship Matrices

The observable phenotype is the manifestation of information that is passed along different organization levels (transcriptional, translational, and metabolic) of a biological system. The widespread use of various omic technologies (RNA-sequencing, metabolomics, etc.) has provided plant genetics and breeders with a wealth of information on pertinent intermediate molecular processes that may help explain variation in conventional traits such as yield, seed quality, and fitness, among others. A major challenge is effectively using these data to help predict the genetic merit of new, unobserved individuals for conventional agronomic traits. Trait-specific genomic relationship matrices (TGRMs) model the relationships between individuals using genome-wide markers (SNPs) and place greater emphasis on markers that most relevant to the trait compared to conventional genomic relationship matrices. Given that these approaches define relationships based on putative causal loci, it is expected that these approaches should improve predictions for related traits. In this study we evaluated the use of TGRMs to accommodate information on intermediate molecular phenotypes (referred to as endophenotypes) and to predict an agronomic trait, total lipid content, in oat seed. Nine fatty acids were quantified in a panel of 336 oat lines. Marker effects were estimated for each endophenotype, and were used to construct TGRMs. A multikernel TRGM model (MK-TRGM-BLUP) was used to predict total seed lipid content in an independent panel of 210 oat lines. The MK-TRGM-BLUP approach significantly improved predictions for total lipid content when compared to a conventional genomic BLUP (gBLUP) approach. Given that the MK-TGRM-BLUP approach leverages information on the nine fatty acids to predict genetic values for total lipid content in unobserved individuals, we compared the MK-TGRM-BLUP approach to a multi-trait gBLUP (MT-gBLUP) approach that jointly fits phenotypes for fatty acids and total lipid content. The MK-TGRM-BLUP approach significantly outperformed MT-gBLUP. Collectively, these results highlight the utility of using TGRM to accommodate information on endophenotypes and improve genomic prediction for a conventional agronomic trait.

[1]  Wenzhong Liu,et al.  Efficient weighting methods for genomic best linear-unbiased prediction (BLUP) adapted to the genetic architectures of quantitative traits , 2020, Heredity.

[2]  Kevin P. Smith,et al.  Translating insights from the seed metabolome into improved prediction for healthful compounds in oat (Avena sativa L.) , 2020, bioRxiv.

[3]  A. Malmendal,et al.  Prediction of complex phenotypes using the Drosophila metabolome , 2020, bioRxiv.

[4]  Daniel E. Runcie,et al.  MegaLMM: Mega-scale linear mixed models for genomic predictions with thousands of traits , 2020, Genome Biology.

[5]  I Misztal,et al.  Current status of genomic evaluation , 2020, Journal of animal science.

[6]  Samuel B. Fernandes,et al.  Multi-Trait Genome-wide Association Studies Reveal Loci Associated with Maize Inflorescence and Leaf Architecture. , 2020, Plant & cell physiology.

[7]  Timothy M. Beissinger,et al.  Genomic Prediction Informed by Biological Processes Expands Our Understanding of the Genetic Architecture Underlying Free Amino Acid Traits in Dry Arabidopsis Seeds , 2019, bioRxiv.

[8]  R. Fernando,et al.  Inferring trait-specific similarity among individuals from molecular markers and phenotypes with Bayesian regression. , 2019, Theoretical population biology.

[9]  Koji Noshita,et al.  Comparison of shape quantification methods for genomic prediction, and genome-wide association study of sorghum seed morphology , 2019, PloS one.

[10]  T. Mackay,et al.  Systems genetics of the Drosophila metabolome , 2019, Genome research.

[11]  T. Mackay,et al.  Leveraging Multiple Layers of Data To Predict Drosophila Complex Traits , 2019, bioRxiv.

[12]  M. Lund,et al.  Quantifying the contribution of sequence variants with regulatory and evolutionary significance to 34 bovine complex traits , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  M. Gore,et al.  Multivariate Genome-Wide Association Analyses Reveal the Genetic Basis of Seed Fatty Acid Composition in Oat (Avena sativa L.) , 2019, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[14]  H. Simianer,et al.  Integrating Gene Expression Data Into Genomic Prediction , 2019, Front. Genet..

[15]  Harkamal Walia,et al.  Genomic Bayesian Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Bayesian Network To Characterize a Wide Spectrum of Rice Phenotypes , 2018, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[16]  Suchismita Mondal,et al.  Hyperspectral Reflectance-Derived Relationship Matrices for Genomic Prediction of Grain Yield in Wheat , 2018, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[17]  M. Gore,et al.  Transcriptome-Wide Association Supplements Genome-Wide Association in Zea mays , 2018, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[18]  M. Lund,et al.  Genomic Prediction Using Multi-trait Weighted GBLUP Accounting for Heterogeneous Variances and Covariances Across the Genome , 2018, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[19]  C. Bastien,et al.  Phenomic Selection Is a Low-Cost and High-Throughput Method Based on Indirect Predictions: Proof of Concept on Wheat and Poplar , 2018, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[20]  Phenomic selection: a low-cost and high-throughput alternative to genomic selection , 2018 .

[21]  A. Melchinger,et al.  Beyond Genomic Prediction: Combining Different Types of omics Data Can Improve Prediction of Hybrid Performance in Maize , 2018, Genetics.

[22]  J. Jannink,et al.  Genomic prediction in a large African maize population , 2017 .

[23]  Omics-based hybrid prediction in maize , 2017, Theoretical and Applied Genetics.

[24]  M. Magwire,et al.  Evaluation of the utility of gene expression and metabolic information for genomic prediction in maize , 2016, Theoretical and Applied Genetics.

[25]  Jean-Luc Jannink,et al.  Evaluating Imputation Algorithms for Low-Depth Genotyping-By-Sequencing (GBS) Data , 2016, PloS one.

[26]  Jean-Luc Jannink,et al.  The Triticeae Toolbox: Combining Phenotype and Genotype Data to Advance Small‐Grains Breeding , 2016, The plant genome.

[27]  G. Covarrubias-Pazaran.  Genome-Assisted Prediction of Quantitative Traits Using the R Package sommer , 2016, PloS one.

[28]  Stefan M. Edwards,et al.  Genomic Prediction for Quantitative Traits Is Improved by Mapping Variants to Gene Ontology Categories in Drosophila melanogaster , 2016, Genetics.

[29]  I. M. MacLeod,et al.  Exploiting biological priors and sequence variants enhances QTL discovery and genomic prediction of complex traits , 2016, BMC Genomics.

[30]  M. Gore,et al.  Closing the Divide between Human Nutrition and Plant Breeding , 2015 .

[31]  Christian Maltecca,et al.  Accounting for trait architecture in genomic predictions of US Holstein cattle using a weighted realized relationship matrix , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[32]  Han Xu,et al.  Partitioning heritability of regulatory and cell-type-specific variants across 11 common diseases. , 2014, American journal of human genetics.

[33]  M. Lund,et al.  Comparison of genomic predictions using genomic relationship matrices built with different weighting factors to account for locus-specific variances. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.

[34]  G. de los Campos,et al.  Genome-Wide Regression and Prediction with the BGLR Statistical Package , 2014, Genetics.

[35]  Doug Speed,et al.  MultiBLUP: improved SNP-based prediction for complex traits , 2014, Genome research.

[36]  R. Fernando,et al.  Prediction of Complex Human Traits Using the Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Predictor , 2013, PLoS genetics.

[37]  D. Gianola.  Priors in Whole-Genome Regression: The Bayesian Alphabet Returns , 2013, Genetics.

[38]  Sayan Mukherjee,et al.  Dissecting High-Dimensional Phenotypes with Bayesian Sparse Factor Analysis of Genetic Covariance Matrices , 2012, Genetics.

[39]  J. Ohlrogge,et al.  Acyl-Lipid Metabolism , 2013, The arabidopsis book.

[40]  Dorian J. Garrick,et al.  A Fast EM Algorithm for BayesA-Like Prediction of Genomic Breeding Values , 2012, PloS one.

[41]  I Misztal,et al.  Efficient computation of the genomic relationship matrix and other matrices used in single-step evaluation. , 2011, Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie.

[42]  N. Palacios-Rojas,et al.  Near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) for protein, tryptophan, and lysine evaluation in quality protein maize (QPM) breeding programs. , 2011, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[43]  Zhe Zhang,et al.  Best Linear Unbiased Prediction of Genomic Breeding Values Using a Trait-Specific Marker-Derived Relationship Matrix , 2010, PloS one.

[44]  J. Rafferty,et al.  Fatty Acid Biosynthesis in Plants — Metabolic Pathways, Structure and Organization , 2009 .

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

[46]  M. Hamberg,et al.  Analysis of oil composition in cultivars and wild species of oat (Avena sp.). , 2008, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[47]  M. Goddard,et al.  Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. , 2001, Genetics.

[48]  J. Ohlrogge,et al.  REGULATION OF FATTY ACID SYNTHESIS. , 1997, Annual review of plant physiology and plant molecular biology.

[49]  A. Melchinger,et al.  Evaluation of Near Infra‐red Reflectance Spectroscopy for Predicting Grain and Stover Quality Traits in Maize , 1986 .