Evaluación genómica en ganado Holstein Colombiano, usando genotipos imputados a densidad media

Contenido principal del artículo

Autores

Juan C. Zambrano https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5205-7621 José Julián Echeverri Zuluaga https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9613-0621 Albeiro López Herrera https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1444-3470

Resumen

Objetivo. Determinar la precisión y el sesgo de predicción de valores genómicos directos (VGD) usando genotipos imputados a densidad media, en características productivas y reproductivas en ganado Holstein de Antioquia, Colombia. Materiales y métodos. Fueron genotipificados 31 animales con el chip Illumina BovineLD, 64 con el chip Illumina BovineSNP50v2 y 48 con el chip Illumina BovineHD. La imputación se realizó usando dos paneles de SNPs (6K y 40K) a una densidad 44K, usando el programa FINDHAP.f90 v4. Los efectos de los SNPs fueron estimados mediante el método bayes_C, usando genotipos de baja densidad (6K) y genotipos imputados a una densidad media (44_imputado). La precisión y el sesgo de los VGDs fueron determinados mediante validación cruzada. Las características evaluadas fueron: producción de leche (PL), porcentaje de proteína (PRO), porcentaje de grasa (GRA), puntaje de células somáticas (SCS), intervalo entre partos (IEP) y días abiertos (DA). Resultados. Las precisiones de VGD (rpVGD;EBV) en todas las características evaluadas oscilaron entre 0.19 y 0.24 y el sesgo (bVGD;EBV) entre 0.03 y 0.16 cuando se usó el panel 6K y usando el panel 44K_imputado las precisiones fueron mayores, oscilado entre 0.24 y 0.33 y sesgo entre 0.03 y 0.26. Conclusiones. La precisión de predicción de los VGDs fue mayor cuando se usaron genotipos imputados a densidad media, en comparación con la precisión de predicción obtenida empleando genotipos de baja densidad. Por lo cual, en este estudio se concluye que la imputación de genotipos es muy útil dado que aumenta la confiabilidad de la evaluación genómica.

Palabras clave:

Detalles del artículo

Referencias

1. Goddard ME, Hayes BJ. Genomic Selection. J Anim Breed Genet. 2007; 124(6):323-330. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0388.2007.00702.x

2. Wang L, Zhu G, Johnson W, Kher M. Three new approaches to genomic selection. Plant Breeding. 2018;137(5):673–681. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12640

3. Meuwissen TH, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME: Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics. 2001; 157(4):1819–1829. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11290733

4. Boichard D, Chung H, Dassonneville R, David X, Eggen A, Fritz S. et al. Design of a bovine low-density SNP array optimized for imputation. PLoS ONE. 2012; 7(3):e34130. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034130

5. Weng Z, Zhang Z, Ding X, Fu W, Ma P, Wang C, Zhang Q. Application of imputation methods to genomic selection in Chinese Holstein cattle. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2012, 3(1):6. https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-1891-3-6

6. Khatkar MS, Moser G, Hayes BJ, Raadsma HW. Strategies and utility of imputed SNP genotypes for genomic analysis in dairy cattle. BMC Genomics. 2012; 13(1):538. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-13-538

7. Schefers J, Weigel KA. Genomic selection in dairy cattle: Integration of DNA testing into breeding programs. Anim Front. 2012; 12(1):4-9. https://doi.org/10.2527/af.2011-0032

8. Huang YJ, Hickey JM, Cleveland MA, Maltecca C. Assessment of alternative genotyping strategies to maximize imputation accuracy at minimal cost. Genet Sel Evol. 2012; 44(1):25. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-44-25

9. Scheet P, Stephens M. A fast and flexible statistical model for large-scale population genotype data: Applications to inferring missing genotypes and haplotypic phase. Am J Hum Genet. 2006; 78(4):629-644. https://doi.org/10.1086/502802

10. Browning BL, Browning SR. A unified approach to genotype imputation and haplotype phase inference for large data sets of trios and unrelated individuals. Am J Hum Genet. 2009; 84(2):210-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.01.005

11. Howie BN, Donnelly P, Marchini J. A flexible and accurate genotype imputation method for the next generation of genome-wide association studies. PLoS Genet. 2009; 5(6):e1000529. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000529

12. VanRaden PM, Null DJ, Sargolzaei M, Wiggans GR, Tooker ME, Cole JB, et al. Genomic imputation and evaluation using high-density Holstein genotypes. J Dairy Sci. 2013; 96(1):668–678. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-5702

13. Sargolzaei M, Chesnais JP, Schenkel FS. A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives. BMC Genomics. 2014; 15: 478. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-478

14. Weigel KA, Van Tassell CP, O’Connell JR, VanRaden PM, Wiggans GR. Prediction of unobserved single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes of Jersey cattle using reference panels and population-based imputation algorithms. J Dairy Sci. 2010; 93(5):2229-2238. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2849

15. Zhang Z, Druet T. Marker imputation with low-density marker panels in Dutch Holstein cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2010; 93(11):5487-5494. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3501

16. Wiggans GR, Cole JB, Hubbard SM, Sonstegard TS. Genomic Selection in Dairy Cattle: The USDA Experience. Ann Rev Anim Biosci. 2017; 5(1):309–327. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-021815-111422

17. Rincón JC, Zambrano JC, Echeverri JJ. Estimation of genetic and phenotypic parameters for production traits in Holstein and Jersey from Colombia. Rev MVZ Córdoba. 2015; 20(Supl):4962-4973. https://doi.org/10.21897/rmvz.11

18. Echeverri J, Zambrano JC, López-Herrera A. Genomic evaluation of Holstein Cattle in Antioquia (Colombia): a case study. Rev Colomb Cienc Pecu. 2014; 27(4):306-314. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0120-06902014000400009

19. Zambrano JC, Rincón JC, López A, Echeverri JJ. Estimation and comparison of conventional and genomic breeding values in Holstein cattle of Antioquia, Colombia. Rev MVZ Córdoba. 2015; 20(3):4739-4753. https://doi.org/10.21897/rmvz.44

20. Martínez R, Gómez Y, Rocha JFM. Genome-wide association study on growth traits in Colombian creole breeds and crossbreeds with Zebu cattle. Genet Mol Res. 2014; 13(3):6420-6432. https://doi.org/10.4238/2014.august.25.5

21. Martínez R, Mar JF, Bejarano D, Burgos W. Genomic predictions and accuracy of weight traits in a breeding program for Colombian Zebu Brahman [On line]. Proceedings of the World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production. 2018. http://www.wcgalp.org/system/files/proceedings/2018/genomic-predictions-and-accuracy-weight-traits-breeding-program-colombian-zebu-brahman.pdf

22. Ali AK, Shook GE. An Optimun transformation for somatic cell concentration in milk. J Dairy Sci. 1980; 63(3):487-490. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(80)82959-6

23. Kizilkaya k, Fernando RL, Garrick DJ. Genomic Prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fifty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes. J Anim Sci. 2010; 88(2):544-551. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2064

24. Verbyla KL, Bowman PJ, Hayes BJ, Raadsma H, Goddard ME. Sensitivity of genomic selection to using different prior distributions. BMC Proc 2010; 4(1):S5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-4-s1-s5

25. Meuwissen T, Hayes B, Goddard M. Accelerating Improvement of livestock with Genomic Selection. Annu Rev Anim Biosci. 2013; 1(1):221-237. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-031412-103705

26. Chen L, Li C, Zargolzaei M, Schenkel F. Impact of genotypes imputation on the performance of GBLUP and bayesian methods for genomic prediction. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(7):e101544. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101544

27. Vázquez AI, Rosa GJ, Weigel KA, de los Campos G, Gianola D, Allison DB. Predictive ability of subsets of single nucleotide polymorphisms with and without parent average in US Holsteins. J Dairy Sci. 2010; 93(12):5942–5949. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3335

28. Habier D, Rohan LF, Kizilkaya K, Garrick DJ. Extension of the bayesian alphabet for genomic Selection. BMC Bioinformatics. 2011; 12(1):186. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-186

29. Hayes BJ, Bowman PJ, Chamberlain AJ, Goddard ME. Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: Progress and challenges. J Dairy Sci 2009; 92(2):433–443. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1646 https://doi.org/pdf/10.4081/ijas.2013.e91

30. Nicolazzi EL, Negrini R, Chamberlain AJ, Goddard ME, Marsan PA, Hayes BJ. Effect of Prior Distributions on Accuracy of Genomic Breeding Values for Two Dairy Traits. Ital J Anim Sci 2013; 12(e91):555-561. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.4081/ijas.2013.e91

31. Colombani C, Legarra A, Fritz S, Guillaume F, Croiseau P, Ducrocq V, et al. Application of Bayesian least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and BayesCπ methods for genomic selection in French Holstein and Montbéliarde breeds. J Dairy Sci. 2013; 96(1):575–591. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-5225

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.