RESUMO
Inbreeding depression reduces the mean phenotypic value of important traits in livestock populations. The goal of this work was to estimate the level of inbreeding and inbreeding depression for growth and reproductive traits in Argentinean Brangus cattle, in order to obtain a diagnosis and monitor breed management. Data comprised 359,257 (from which 1,990 were genotyped for 40,678 single nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]) animals with phenotypic records for at least one of three growth traits: birth weight (BW), weaning weight (WW), and finishing weight (FW). For scrotal circumference (SC), 52,399 phenotypic records (of which 256 had genotype) were available. There were 530,938 animals in pedigree. Three methods to estimate inbreeding coefficients were used. Pedigree-based inbreeding coefficients were estimated accounting for missing parents. Inbreeding coefficients combining genotyped and nongenotyped animal information were also computed from matrix H of the single-step approach. Genomic inbreeding coefficients were estimated using homozygous segments obtained from a Hidden Markov model (HMM) approach. Inbreeding depression was estimated from the regression of the phenotype on inbreeding coefficients in a multiple-trait mixed model framework, either for the whole dataset or for the dataset of genotyped animals. All traits were unfavorably affected by inbreeding depression. A 10% increase in pedigree-based or combined inbreeding would result in a reduction of 0.34 to 0.39 kg in BW, 2.77 to 3.28 kg in WW, and 0.23 cm in SC. For FW, a 10% increase in pedigree-based, genomic, or combined inbreeding would result in a decrease of 8.05 to 11.57 kg. Genomic inbreeding based on the HMM was able to capture inbreeding depression, even in such a compressed genotyped dataset.
Assuntos
Depressão por Endogamia , Animais , Bovinos/genética , Genômica , Genótipo , Endogamia , Linhagem , Fenótipo , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo ÚnicoRESUMO
Estimates of dominance variance for growth traits in beef cattle based on pedigree data vary considerably across studies, and the proportion of genetic variance explained by dominance deviations remains largely unknown. The potential benefits of including nonadditive genetic effects in the genomic model combined with the increasing availability of large genomic data sets have recently renewed the interest in including nonadditive genetic effects in genomic evaluation models. The availability of genomic information enables the computation of covariance matrices of dominant genomic relationships among animals, similar to matrices of additive genomic relationships, and in a more straightforward manner than the pedigree-based dominance relationship matrix. Data from 19,357 genotyped American Angus males were used to estimate additive and dominant variance components for 3 growth traits: birth weight, weaning weight, and postweaning gain, and to evaluate the benefit of including dominance effects in beef cattle genomic evaluations. Variance components were estimated using 2 models: the first one included only additive effects (MG) and the second one included both additive and dominance effects (MGD). The dominance deviation variance ranged from 3% to 8% of the additive variance for all 3 traits. Gibbs sampling and REML estimates showed good concordance. Goodness of fit of the models was assessed by a likelihood ratio test. For all traits, MG fitted the data as well as MGD as assessed either by the likelihood ratio test or by the Akaike information criterion. Predictive ability of both models was assessed by cross-validation and did not improve when including dominance effects in the model. There was little evidence of nonadditive genetic variation for growth traits in the American Angus male population as only a small proportion of genetic variation was explained by nonadditive effects. A genomic model including the dominance effect did not improve the model fit. Consequently, including nonadditive effects in the genomic evaluation model is not beneficial for growth traits in the American Angus male population.
Assuntos
Bovinos/genética , Variação Genética , Genômica , Modelos Genéticos , Animais , Cruzamento , Bovinos/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Genes Dominantes , Genótipo , Masculino , Linhagem , Fenótipo , Polimorfismo de Nucleotídeo ÚnicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Metafounders are pseudo-individuals that encapsulate genetic heterozygosity and relationships within and across base pedigree populations, i.e. ancestral populations. This work addresses the estimation and usefulness of metafounder relationships in single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP). RESULTS: We show that ancestral relationship parameters are proportional to standardized covariances of base allelic frequencies across populations, such as [Formula: see text] fixation indexes. These covariances of base allelic frequencies can be estimated from marker genotypes of related recent individuals and pedigree. Simple methods for their estimation include naïve computation of allele frequencies from marker genotypes or a method of moments that equates average pedigree-based and marker-based relationships. Complex methods include generalized least squares (best linear unbiased estimator (BLUE)) or maximum likelihood based on pedigree relationships. To our knowledge, methods to infer [Formula: see text] coefficients from marker data have not been developed for related individuals. We derived a genomic relationship matrix, compatible with pedigree relationships, that is constructed as a cross-product of {-1,0,1} codes and that is equivalent (apart from scale factors) to an identity-by-state relationship matrix at genome-wide markers. Using a simulation with a single population under selection in which only males and youngest animals are genotyped, we observed that generalized least squares or maximum likelihood gave accurate and unbiased estimates of the ancestral relationship parameter (true value: 0.40) whereas the naïve method and the method of moments were biased (average estimates of 0.43 and 0.35). We also observed that genomic evaluation by ssGBLUP using metafounders was less biased in terms of estimates of genetic trend (bias of 0.01 instead of 0.12), resulted in less overdispersed (0.94 instead of 0.99) and as accurate (0.74) estimates of breeding values than ssGBLUP without metafounders and provided consistent estimates of heritability. CONCLUSIONS: Estimation of metafounder relationships can be achieved using BLUP-like methods with pedigree and markers. Inclusion of metafounder relationships reduces bias of genomic predictions with no loss in accuracy.