The Impact of Non-additive Effects on the Genetic Correlation Between Populations

Average effects of alleles can show considerable differences between populations. The magnitude of these differences can be measured by the additive genetic correlation between populations (rg). This rg can be lower than one due to the presence of non-additive genetic effects together with differences in allele frequencies between populations. However, the relationship between the nature of non-additive effects, differences in allele frequencies, and the value of rg remains unclear, and was therefore the focus of this study. We simulated genotype data of two populations that have diverged under drift only, or under drift and selection, and we simulated traits where the genetic model and magnitude of non-additive effects were varied. Results showed that larger differences in allele frequencies and larger non-additive effects resulted in lower values of rg. In addition, we found that with epistasis, rg decreases with an increase of the number of interactions per locus. For both dominance and epistasis, we found that, when non-additive effects became extremely large, rg had a lower bound that was determined by the type of inter-allelic interaction, and the difference in allele frequencies between populations. Given that dominance variance is usually small, our results show that it is unlikely that true rg values lower than 0.80 are due to dominance effects alone. With realistic levels of epistasis, rg dropped as low as 0.45. These results may contribute to the understanding of differences in genetic expression of complex traits between populations, and may help in explaining the inefficiency of genomic trait prediction across populations.

[1]  M. Calus,et al.  BOARD INVITED REVIEW: The purebred-crossbred correlation in pigs: A review of theory, estimates, and implications. , 2017, Journal of animal science.

[2]  Andrés Legarra,et al.  Joint genomic evaluation of French dairy cattle breeds using multiple-trait models , 2012, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[3]  J. Cheverud,et al.  Epistasis and its contribution to genetic variance components. , 1995, Genetics.

[4]  The effect of gene interactions on the long-term response to selection , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  L. Varona,et al.  Genomic analysis of dominance effects on milk production and conformation traits in Fleckvieh cattle , 2013, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[6]  W. Bateson.  Mendel's Principles of Heredity , 1910, Nature.

[7]  Utility of whole-genome sequence data for across-breed genomic prediction , 2018, Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE.

[8]  Guosheng Su,et al.  A common reference population from four European Holstein populations increases reliability of genomic predictions , 2011, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[9]  Ben J Hayes,et al.  Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations , 2009, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[10]  T. Meuwissen,et al.  Testing strategies for genomic selection in aquaculture breeding programs , 2009, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[11]  D. Falconer,et al.  Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. , 1962 .

[12]  Ö. Carlborg,et al.  On the Relationship Between High-Order Linkage Disequilibrium and Epistasis , 2018, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[13]  P. Waldmann,et al.  The effect of non-additive genetic interactions on selection in multi-locus genetic models , 2007, Heredity.

[14]  J. Werf,et al.  Relationship between purebred and crossbred parameters, 1: Variances and covariances under the one-locus model , 1991 .

[15]  M. Goddard.  The validity of genetic models underlying quantitative traits , 2001 .

[16]  Mats E. Pettersson,et al.  Replication and Explorations of High-Order Epistasis Using a Large Advanced Intercross Line Pedigree , 2011, PLoS genetics.

[17]  T. Mackay.  Epistasis and quantitative traits: using model organisms to study gene–gene interactions , 2013, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[18]  Mehdi Sargolzaei,et al.  QMSim: a large-scale genome simulator for livestock , 2009, Bioinform..

[19]  W. G. Hill,et al.  Influence of Gene Interaction on Complex Trait Variation with Multilocus Models , 2014, Genetics.

[20]  J. Woolliams,et al.  Maternal, dominance and additive genetic effects in Nile tilapia; influence on growth, fillet yield and body size traits , 2018, Heredity.

[21]  Chris S. Haley,et al.  Detecting epistasis in human complex traits , 2014, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[22]  J. Bennewitz,et al.  The distribution of QTL additive and dominance effects in porcine F2 crosses. , 2010, Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie.

[23]  R. Fisher.  XV.—The Correlation between Relatives on the Supposition of Mendelian Inheritance. , 1919, Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

[24]  J. Crow,et al.  THE NUMBER OF ALLELES THAT CAN BE MAINTAINED IN A FINITE POPULATION. , 1964, Genetics.

[25]  J. Woolliams,et al.  Within- and across-breed genomic prediction using whole-genome sequence and single nucleotide polymorphism panels , 2016, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[26]  W. G. Hill,et al.  "Conversion" of epistatic into additive genetic variance in finite populations and possible impact on long-term selection response. , 2017, Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie.

[27]  D. Falconer.  The Problem of Environment and Selection , 1952, The American Naturalist.

[28]  W. G. Hill.  Is Continued Genetic Improvement of Livestock Sustainable? , 2016, Genetics.

[29]  Empirical and deterministic accuracies of across-population genomic prediction , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[30]  J. Werf,et al.  Relationship between purebred and crossbred parameters. 2. Genetic correlation between purebred and crossbred performance under the model with two loci. , 1991 .

[31]  O. Kempthorne,et al.  The correlation between relatives in a random mating population , 1954, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B - Biological Sciences.

[32]  A. C. Sørensen,et al.  Response to Selection in Finite Locus Models with Nonadditive Effects , 2017, The Journal of heredity.

[33]  Trudy F C Mackay,et al.  Epistasis for quantitative traits in Drosophila. , 2015, Methods in molecular biology.

[34]  P. Visscher,et al.  Additive genetic variation in schizophrenia risk is shared by populations of African and European descent. , 2013, American journal of human genetics.

[35]  M. Lynch,et al.  Evolution and Selection of Quantitative Traits , 2018, Oxford Scholarship Online.

[36]  J. V. D. van der Werf,et al.  Genomic estimation of additive and dominance effects and impact of accounting for dominance on accuracy of genomic evaluation in sheep populations , 2017, Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie.

[37]  L. Varona,et al.  Orthogonal Estimates of Variances for Additive, Dominance, and Epistatic Effects in Populations , 2017, Genetics.

[38]  Xiaochun Sun,et al.  Method to represent the distribution of QTL additive and dominance effects associated with quantitative traits in computer simulation , 2016, BMC Bioinformatics.

[39]  S. Kerje,et al.  A global search reveals epistatic interaction between QTL for early growth in the chicken. , 2003, Genome research.

[40]  Joachim Hermisson,et al.  The role of epistatic gene interactions in the response to selection and the evolution of evolvability. , 2005, Theoretical population biology.

[41]  C. Schrooten,et al.  Genomic prediction for numerically small breeds, using models with pre-selected and differentially weighted markers , 2018, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[42]  Patrick J. Monnahan,et al.  Epistasis Is a Major Determinant of the Additive Genetic Variance in Mimulus guttatus , 2015, PLoS genetics.

[43]  Toby Johnson,et al.  Theoretical models of selection and mutation on quantitative traits , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  Genomic prediction of growth in pigs based on a model including additive and dominance effects. , 2016, Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie.

[45]  A. Reverter,et al.  Dominance and epistatic genetic variances for litter size in pigs using genomic models , 2018, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[46]  C. Cockerham,et al.  An Extension of the Concept of Partitioning Hereditary Variance for Analysis of Covariances among Relatives When Epistasis Is Present. , 1954, Genetics.

[47]  T. F. Hansen.  WHY EPISTASIS IS IMPORTANT FOR SELECTION AND ADAPTATION , 2013, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[48]  S. McWilliam,et al.  Genomic correlation: harnessing the benefit of combining two unrelated populations for genomic selection , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[49]  A. C. Sørensen,et al.  A crossbred reference population can improve the response to genomic selection for crossbred performance , 2015, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[50]  R. Wellmann,et al.  The contribution of dominance to the understanding of quantitative genetic variation. , 2011, Genetics research.

[51]  Leonid Kruglyak,et al.  Accounting for genetic interactions improves modeling of individual quantitative trait phenotypes in yeast , 2016, Nature Genetics.

[52]  J. Cheverud,et al.  EPISTASIS AS A SOURCE OF INCREASED ADDITIVE GENETIC VARIANCE AT POPULATION BOTTLENECKS , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[53]  M. Goddard,et al.  Reliability of Genomic Predictions Across Multiple Populations , 2009, Genetics.

[54]  O. Carlborg,et al.  A Unified Model for Functional and Statistical Epistasis and Its Application in Quantitative Trait Loci Analysis , 2007, Genetics.

[55]  Imperfect Linkage Disequilibrium Generates Phantom Epistasis (& Perils of Big Data) , 2019, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[56]  R. Fernando,et al.  Persistence of accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values over generations in layer chickens , 2011, Genetics Selection Evolution.

[57]  Brielin C. Brown,et al.  Transethnic genetic correlation estimates from summary statistics , 2016, bioRxiv.

[58]  A. Le Rouzic,et al.  Dissection of the Genetic Architecture of Body Weight in Chicken Reveals the Impact of Epistasis on Domestication Traits , 2008, Genetics.

[59]  W. G. Hill,et al.  Data and Theory Point to Mainly Additive Genetic Variance for Complex Traits , 2008, PLoS genetics.