The impact of genetic architecture on genome-wide evaluation methods.
The rapid increase in high-throughput single-nucleotide polymorphism data has led to a great interest in applying genome-wide evaluation methods to identify an individual's genetic merit. Genome-wide evaluation combines statistical methods with genomic data to predict genetic values for complex traits. Considerable uncertainty currently exists in determining which genome-wide evaluation method is the most appropriate. We hypothesize that genome-wide methods deal differently with the genetic architecture of quantitative traits and genomes. A genomic linear method (GBLUP), and a genomic nonlinear Bayesian variable selection method (BayesB) are compared using stochastic simulation across three effective population sizes and a wide range of numbers of quantitative trait loci (N(QTL)). GBLUP had a constant accuracy, for a given heritability and sample size, regardless of N(QTL). BayesB had a higher accuracy than GBLUP when N(QTL) was low, but this advantage diminished as N(QTL) increased and when N(QTL) became large, GBLUP slightly outperformed BayesB. In addition, deterministic equations are extended to predict the accuracy of both methods and to estimate the number of independent chromosome segments (M(e)) and N(QTL). The predictions of accuracy and estimates of M(e) and N(QTL) were generally in good agreement with results from simulated data. We conclude that the relative accuracy of GBLUP and BayesB for a given number of records and heritability are highly dependent on M(e,) which is a property of the target genome, as well as the architecture of the trait (N(QTL)).
Daetwyler
Hans D
HD
The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin EH25 9PS, United Kingdom. hans.daetwyler@dpi.vic.gov.au
Pong-Wong
Ricardo
R
Villanueva
Beatriz
B
Woolliams
John A
JA
D001499:Bayes Theorem; D003198:Computer Simulation; D005260:Female; D005828:Genetics, Population; D015894:Genome, Human; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008957:Models, Genetic; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D040641:Quantitative Trait Loci; D012641:Selection, Genetic
Biometrics. 1975 Jun;31(2):423-47
1174616
Genetics. 2009 Sep;183(1):347-63
19620397
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Jan 05;41:2
19284681
Dev Biol (Basel). 2008;132:219-223
18817305
PLoS Genet. 2008 Oct;4(10):e1000231
18949033
Genetics. 2007 Dec;177(4):2389-97
18073436
Theor Appl Genet. 1968 Jun;38(6):226-31
24442307
Genet Res (Camb). 2009 Feb;91(1):47-60
19220931
J Dairy Sci. 2009 Jan;92(1):16-24
19109259
Nature. 2007 Oct 18;449(7164):851-61
17943122
BMC Proc. 2009 Feb 23;3 Suppl 1:S1
19278535
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Mar 18;41:29
19296851
PLoS Genet. 2006 Mar;2(3):e41
16565746
Genetica. 2009 Jun;136(2):245-57
18704696
Genetics. 2005 Jul;170(3):1435-8
15911578
J Anim Breed Genet. 2007 Dec;124(6):377-89
18076475
Theor Popul Biol. 1971 Jun;2(2):125-41
5170716
BMC Proc. 2010 Mar 31;4 Suppl 1:S4
20380758
PLoS One. 2008;3(10):e3395
18852893
J Anim Sci. 1997 Jul;75(7):1738-45
9222829
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Feb 24;101(8):2398-403
14983021
Science. 2002 Jun 21;296(5576):2225-9
12029063
Genetics. 2008 Jun;179(2):1045-55
18505874
J Dairy Sci. 2009 Feb;92(2):433-43
19164653
J Anim Sci. 2005 Aug;83(8):1747-52
16024693
Genetics. 2001 Apr;157(4):1819-29
11290733
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Jun 11;41:35
19519896
Genetics. 2003 Feb;163(2):789-801
12618414
J Dairy Sci. 2008 Nov;91(11):4414-23
18946147
J Anim Breed Genet. 2007 Dec;124(6):331-41
18076470
Nat Genet. 2001 Oct;29(2):109-11
11586289
Nature. 2006 Nov 23;444(7118):444-54
17122850
Genome Res. 2007 Apr;17(4):520-6
17351134
J Anim Breed Genet. 2007 Dec;124(6):369-76
18076474
Genetics. 2009 May;182(1):355-64
19299342