Genomic information allows for more accurate breeding values for milkability in dual-purpose Italian Simmental cattle

Milkability is a trait related to the milking efficiency of an animal, and it is a component of the herd profitability. Due to its economic importance, milkability is currently included in the selection index of the Italian Simmental cattle breed with a weight of 7.5%. This lowly heritable trait is measured on a subjective scale from 1 to 3 (1 = slow, 3 = fast), and genetic evaluations are performed by pedigree-based BLUP. Genomic information is now available for some animals in the Italian Simmental population, and its inclusion in the genetic evaluation system could increase accuracy of breeding values and genetic progress for milkability. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and advantages of having a genomic evaluation for this trait in the Italian Simmental population. Phenotypes were available for 131,308 cows. A total of 9,526 animals had genotypes for 42,152 loci; among the genotyped animals, 2,455 were cows with phenotypes, and the other were their relatives. The youngest cows with both phenotypes and genotypes (n = 900) were identified as selection candidates. Variance components and heritability were estimated using pedigree information, whereas genetic and genomic evaluations were carried out using BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP), respectively. In addition, a weighted ssGBLUP was assessed using genomic regions from a genome-wide association study. Evaluation models were validated using theoretical and realized accuracies. The estimated heritability for milkability was 0.12 ± 0.01. The mean theoretical accuracies for selection candidates were 0.43 ± 0.08 (BLUP) and 0.53 ± 0.06 (ssGBLUP). The mean realized accuracies based on linear regression statistics were 0.29 (BLUP) and 0.40 (ssGBLUP). No genomic regions were significantly associated with milkability, thus no improvements in accuracy were observed when using weighted ssGBLUP. Results indicated that genomic information could improve the accuracy of breeding values and increase genetic progress for milkability in Italian Simmental.     

Differing genetic trend estimates from traditional and genomic evaluations of genotyped animals as evidence of preselection bias in US Holsteins

The objective of this study was to compare genetic trends from single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) and traditional BLUP models for milk production traits of US Holsteins. Phenotypes were 305-d milk, fat, and protein yields from 21,527,040 cows recorded between January 1990 and August 2015. The pedigree file included 29,651,623 animals and was limited to 3 generations back from recorded or genotyped animals. Genotypes for 764,029 animals were used, and analyses were by a 3-trait repeatability model as used in the US official genetic evaluation. Unknown-parent groups were incorporated into the inverse of a relationship matrix (H^?1 in ssGBLUP and A^?1 in BLUP) with the QP transformation. For ssGBLUP, 18,359 genotyped animals were randomly chosen as core animals to calculate the inverse of the genomic relationship matrix with the APY algorithm. Computations took 6.5 h and 1.4 GB of memory for BLUP, and 13 h and 115 GB of memory for ssGBLUP. For genotyped sires with at least 10 daughters, the average genetic levels for predicted transmitting ability (PTA) and genomic PTA were similar up to 2008, with a higher level for ssGBLUP later (approximately by 36 kg for milk, 2.1 kg for fat, and 1.1 kg for protein for bulls born in 2010). For genotyped cows, the average genetic levels were similar up to 2006, with a higher level for ssGBLUP (approximately by 91 kg for milk, 3.6 kg for fat, and 2.7 kg for protein for cows born in 2012). For all cows, the average levels were slightly higher for ssGBLUP, with much smaller differences than for genotyped cows. Trends for BLUP indicate bias due to genomic preselection for genotyped sires and cows. For official evaluations released in December 2016, traditional PTA had the same trend as multiple-step genomic PTA for both genotyped bulls and cows except for the youngest bulls, who had traditional PTA slightly lower than genomic PTA. For genotyped bulls born in recent years, genetic gain for official traditional and genomic evaluations was similar in contrast to ssGBLUP and BLUP differences. Official PTA for cows were adjusted so that the Mendelian sampling variance was comparable with that for bulls, and those adjustments likely removed bias due to genomic preselection from traditional PTA, especially for genotyped cows. The ssGBLUP method seems to account partially for that bias and is computationally suitable for national evaluations.     

Genomic predictions for yield traits in US Holsteins with unknown parent groups

The objective of this study was to assess the reliability and bias of estimated breeding values (EBV) from traditional BLUP with unknown parent groups (UPG), genomic EBV (GEBV) from single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) with UPG for the pedigree relationship matrix (A) only (SS_UPG), and GEBV from ssGBLUP with UPG for both A and the relationship matrix among genotyped animals (A₂₂; SS_UPG2) using 6 large phenotype-pedigree truncated Holstein data sets. The complete data included 80 million records for milk, fat, and protein yields from 31 million cows recorded since 1980. Phenotype-pedigree truncation scenarios included truncation of phenotypes for cows recorded before 1990 and 2000 combined with truncation of pedigree information after 2 or 3 ancestral generations. A total of 861,525 genotyped bulls with progeny and cows with phenotypic records were used in the analyses. Reliability and bias (inflation/deflation) of GEBV were obtained for 2,710 bulls based on deregressed proofs, and on 381,779 cows born after 2014 based on predictivity (adjusted cow phenotypes). The BLUP reliabilities for young bulls varied from 0.29 to 0.30 across traits and were unaffected by data truncation and number of generations in the pedigree. Reliabilities ranged from 0.54 to 0.69 for SS_UPG and were slightly affected by phenotype-pedigree truncation. Reliabilities ranged from 0.69 to 0.73 for SS_UPG2 and were unaffected by phenotype-pedigree truncation. The regression coefficient of bull deregressed proofs on (G)EBV (i.e., GEBV and EBV) ranged from 0.86 to 0.90 for BLUP, from 0.77 to 0.94 for SS_UPG, and was 1.00 ± 0.03 for SS_UPG2. Cow predictivity ranged from 0.22 to 0.28 for BLUP, 0.48 to 0.51 for SS_UPG, and 0.51 to 0.54 for SS_UPG2. The highest cow predictivities for BLUP were obtained with the most extreme truncation, whereas for SS_UPG2, cow predictivities were also unaffected by phenotype-pedigree truncations. The regression coefficient of cow predictivities on (G)EBV was 1.02 ± 0.02 for SS_UPG2 with the most extreme truncation, which indicated the least biased predictions. Computations with the complete data set took 17 h with BLUP, 58 h with SS_UPG, and 23 h with SS_UPG2. The same computations with the most extreme phenotype-pedigree truncation took 7, 36, and 15 h, respectively. The SS_UPG2 converged in fewer rounds than BLUP, whereas SS_UPG took up to twice as many rounds. Thus, the ssGBLUP with UPG assigned to both A and A₂₂ provided accurate and unbiased evaluations, regardless of phenotype-pedigree truncation scenario. Old phenotypes (before 2000 in this data set) did not affect the reliability of predictions for young selection candidates, especially in SS_UPG2.     

Invited review: Unknown-parent groups and metafounders in single-step genomic BLUP

Single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) is a method for genomic prediction that integrates matrices of pedigree (A) and genomic (G) relationships into a single unified additive relationship matrix whose inverse is incorporated into a set of mixed model equations (MME) to compute genomic predictions. Pedigree information in dairy cattle is often incomplete. Missing pedigree potentially causes biases and inflation in genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) obtained with ssGBLUP. Three major issues are associated with missing pedigree in ssGBLUP, namely biased predictions by selection, missing inbreeding in pedigree relationships, and incompatibility between G and A in level and scale. These issues can be solved using a proper model for unknown-parent groups (UPG). The theory behind the use of UPG is well established for pedigree BLUP, but not for ssGBLUP. This study reviews the development of the UPG model in pedigree BLUP, the properties of UPG models in ssGBLUP, and the effect of UPG on genetic trends and genomic predictions. Similarities and differences between UPG and metafounder (MF) models, a generalized UPG model, are also reviewed. A UPG model (QP) derived using a transformation of the MME has a good convergence behavior. However, with insufficient data, the QP model may yield biased genetic trends and may underestimate UPG. The QP model can be altered by removing the genomic relationships linking GEBV and UPG effects from MME. This altered QP model exhibits less bias in genetic trends and less inflation in genomic predictions than the QP model, especially with large data sets. Recently, a new model, which encapsulates the UPG equations into the pedigree relationships for genotyped animals, was proposed in simulated purebred populations. The MF model is a comprehensive solution to the missing pedigree issue. This model can be a choice for multibreed or crossbred evaluations if the data set allows the estimation of a reasonable relationship matrix for MF. Missing pedigree influences genetic trends, but its effect on the predictability of genetic merit for genotyped animals should be negligible when many proven bulls are genotyped. The SNP effects can be back-solved using GEBV from older genotyped animals, and these predicted SNP effects can be used to calculate GEBV for young-genotyped animals with missing parents.     

Estimating variance components and breeding values for number of oocytes and number of embryos in dairy cattle using a single-step genomic evaluation

Reproductive technologies such as multiple ovulation and embryo transfer (MOET) and ovum pick-up (OPU) accelerate genetic improvement in dairy breeding schemes. To enhance the efficiency of embryo production, breeding values for traits such as number of oocytes (NoO) and number of MOET embryos (NoM) can help in selection of donors with high MOET or OPU efficiency. The aim of this study was therefore to estimate variance components and (genomic) breeding values for NoO and NoM based on Dutch Holstein data. Furthermore, a 10-fold cross-validation was carried out to assess the accuracy of pedigree and genomic breeding values for NoO and NoM. For NoO, 40,734 OPU sessions between 1993 and 2015 were analyzed. These OPU sessions originated from 2,543 donors, from which 1,144 were genotyped. For NoM, 35,695 sessions between 1994 and 2015 were analyzed. These MOET sessions originated from 13,868 donors, from which 3,716 were genotyped. Analyses were done using only pedigree information and using a single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) approach combining genomic information and pedigree information. Heritabilities were very similar based on pedigree information or based on ssGBLUP [i.e., 0.32 (standard error = 0.03) for NoO and 0.21 (standard error = 0.01) for NoM with pedigree, 0.31 (standard error = 0.03) for NoO, and 0.22 (standard error = 0.01) for NoM with ssGBLUP]. For animals without their own information as mimicked in the cross-validation, the accuracy of pedigree-based breeding values was 0.46 for NoO and NoM. The accuracies of genomic breeding values from ssGBLUP were 0.54 for NoO and 0.52 for NoM. These results show that including genomic information increases the accuracies. These moderate accuracies in combination with a large genetic variance show good opportunities for selection of potential bull dams.     

Application of single-step genomic evaluation using multiple-trait random regression test-day models in dairy cattle

Test-day traits are important for genetic evaluation in dairy cattle and are better modeled by multiple-trait random regression models (RRM). The reliability and bias of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) predicted using multiple-trait RRM via single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) were investigated in the 3 major dairy cattle breeds in Canada (i.e., Ayrshire, Holstein, and Jersey). Individual additive genomic random regression coefficients for the test-day traits were predicted using 2 multiple-trait RRM: (1) one for milk, fat, and protein yields in the first, second, and third lactations, and (2) one for somatic cell score in the first, second, and third lactations. The predicted coefficients were used to derive GEBV for each lactation day and, subsequently, the daily GEBV were compared with traditional daily parent averages obtained by BLUP. To ensure compatibility between pedigree and genomic information for genotyped animals, different scaling factors for combining the inverse of genomic (G^?1) and pedigree (A^?1₂₂) relationship matrices were tested. In addition, the inclusion of only genotypes from animals with accurate breeding values (defined in preliminary analysis) was compared with the inclusion of all available genotypes in the analyzes. The ssGBLUP model led to considerably larger validation reliabilities than the BLUP model without genomic information. In general, scaling factors used to combine the G^?1 and A^?1₂₂ matrices had small influence on the validation reliabilities. However, a greater effect was observed in the inflation of GEBV. Less inflated GEBV were obtained by the ssGBLUP compared with the parent average from traditional BLUP when using optimal scaling factors to combine the G^?1 and A^?1₂₂ matrices. Similar results were observed when including either all available genotypes or only genotypes from animals with accurate breeding values. These findings indicate that ssGBLUP using multiple-trait RRM increases reliability and reduces bias of breeding values of young animals when compared with parent average from traditional BLUP in the Canadian Ayrshire, Holstein, and Jersey breeds.     

Assessment of accuracy of genomic prediction for French Lacaune dairy sheep

Genomic selection in Lacaune dairy sheep was investigated based on genotypes from the OvineSNP50 BeadChip (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA). Historical artificial insemination progeny-tested rams formed a population of 2,892 genotyped rams. Additional ungenotyped rams and females were included by single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). Three prediction strategies were tried: pseudo-BLUP (using all rams and daughter yield deviations), pseudo-ssGBLUP (using all rams and daughter yield deviations), and regular ssGBLUP (using all phenotypes and pedigree in an animal model). The population linkage disequilibrium was determined, with an average squared correlation coefficient of 0.11 for markers closer than 0.1 cM (lower than in dairy cattle). The estimated effective population is 370 individuals. Gain in accuracy of genomic selection over parent averages ranged from 0.10 to 0.20. Highest accuracies and lowest bias were found using regular ssGBLUP. Transition to a genomic breeding scheme is possible but costs need to be carefully evaluated.     

Comparison of genomic predictions for lowly heritable traits using multi-step and single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor in Holstein cattle

The success and sustainability of a breeding program incorporating genomic information is largely dependent on the accuracy of predictions. For low heritability traits, large training populations are required to achieve high accuracies of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV). By including genotyped and nongenotyped animals simultaneously in the evaluation, the single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) approach has the potential to deliver more accurate and less biased genomic evaluations. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and bias of genomic predictions for various traits in Canadian Holstein cattle using ssGBLUP and multi-step genomic BLUP (msGBLUP) under different strategies, such as (1) adding genomic information of cows in the analysis, (2) testing different adjustments of the genomic relationship matrix, and (3) using a blending approach to obtain GEBV from msGBLUP. The following genomic predictions were evaluated regarding accuracy and bias: (1) GEBV estimated by ssGBLUP; (2) direct genomic value estimated by msGBLUP with polygenic effects of 5 and 20%; and (3) GEBV calculated by a blending approach of direct genomic value with estimated breeding values using polygenic effects of 5 and 20%. The effect of adding genomic information of cows in the evaluation was also assessed for each approach. When genomic information was included in the analyses, the average improvement in observed reliability of predictions was observed to be 7 and 13 percentage points for reproductive and workability traits, respectively, compared with traditional BLUP. Absolute deviation from 1 of the regression coefficient of the linear regression of de-regressed estimated breeding values on genomic predictions went from 0.19 when using traditional BLUP to 0.22 when using the msGBLUP method, and to 0.14 when using the ssGBLUP method. The use of polygenic weight of 20% in the msGBLUP slightly improved the reliability of predictions, while reducing the bias. A similar trend was observed when a blending approach was used. Adding genomic information of cows increased reliabilities, while decreasing bias of genomic predictions when using the ssGBLUP method. Differences between using a training population with cows and bulls or with only bulls for the msGBLUP method were small, likely due to the small number of cows included in the analysis. Predictions for lowly heritable traits benefit greatly from genomic information, especially when all phenotypes, pedigrees, and genotypes are used in a single-step approach.     

Modeling missing pedigree in single-step genomic BLUP

The objective was to compare methods of modeling missing pedigree in single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). Options for modeling missing pedigree included ignoring the missing pedigree, unknown parent groups (UPG) based on A (the numerator relationship matrix) or H (the unified pedigree and genomic relationship matrix), and metafounders. The assumptions for the distribution of estimated breeding values changed with the different models. We simulated data with heritabilities of 0.3 and 0.1 for dairy cattle populations that had more missing pedigrees for animals of lesser genetic merit. Predictions for the youngest generation and UPG solutions were compared with the true values for validation. For both traits, ssGBLUP with metafounders provided accurate and unbiased predictions for young animals while also appropriately accounting for genetic trend. Accuracy was least and bias was greatest for ssGBLUP with UPG for H for the trait with heritability of 0.3 and with UPG for A for the trait with heritability of 0.1. For the trait with heritability of 0.1 and UPG for H, the UPG accuracy (SD) was ?0.49 (0.12), suggesting poor estimates of genetic trend despite having little bias for validations on young, genotyped animals. Problems with UPG estimates were likely caused by the lesser amount of information available for the lower heritability trait. Hence, UPG need to be defined differently based on the trait and amount of information. More research is needed to investigate accounting for UPG in A₂₂ to better account for missing pedigrees for genotyped animals.     

Accuracy of genomic evaluation with weighted single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction for milk production traits,udder type traits,and somatic cell scores in French dairy goats

Genomic evaluation of French dairy goats is routinely conducted using the single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) method. This method has the advantage of simultaneously using all phenotypes, pedigrees, and genotypes. However, ssGBLUP assumes that all SNP explain the same amount of genetic variance, which is unlikely in the case of traits whose major genes or QTL are segregating. In this study, we investigated the effect of weighted ssGBLUP and its alternatives, which give more weight to SNP associated with the trait, on the accuracy of genomic evaluation of milk production, udder type traits, and somatic cell scores. The data set included 2,955 genotyped animals and 2,543,680 pedigree animals. The number of phenotypes varied with the trait. The accuracy of genomic evaluation was assessed on 205 genotyped Alpine and 146 genotyped Saanen goats born between 2009 and 2012. For traits with unknown QTL, weighted ssGBLUP was less accurate than, or as accurate as, ssGBLUP. For traits with identified QTL (i.e., QTL only present in the Saanen breed), weighted ssGBLUP outperformed ssGBLUP by between 2 and 14%.     

Accuracies of breeding values for dry matter intake using nongenotyped animals and predictor traits in different lactations

Given the interest of including dry matter intake (DMI) in the breeding goal, accurate estimated breeding values (EBV) for DMI are needed, preferably for separate lactations. Due to the limited amount of records available on DMI, 2 main approaches have been suggested to compute those EBV: (1) the inclusion of predictor traits, such as fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM) and live weight (LW), and (2) the addition of genomic information of animals using what is called genomic prediction. Recently, several methodologies to estimate EBV utilizing genomic information (EBV) have become available. In this study, a new method known as single-step ridge-regression BLUP (SSRR-BLUP) is suggested. The SSRR-BLUP method does not have an imposed limit on the number of genotyped animals, as the commonly used methods do. The objective of this study was to estimate genetic parameters using a relatively large data set with DMI records, as well as compare the accuracies of the EBV for DMI. These accuracies were obtained using 4 different methods: BLUP (using pedigree for all animals with phenotypes), genomic BLUP (GBLUP; only for genotyped animals), single-step GBLUP (SS-GBLUP), and SSRR-BLUP (for genotyped and nongenotyped animals). Records from different lactations, with or without predictor traits (FPCM and LW), were used in the model. Accuracies of EBV for DMI (defined as the correlation between the EBV and pre-adjusted DMI phenotypes divided by the average accuracy of those phenotypes) ranged between 0.21 and 0.38 across methods and scenarios. Accuracies of EBV for DMI using BLUP were the lowest accuracies obtained across methods. Meanwhile, accuracies of EBV for DMI were similar in SS-GBLUP and SSRR-BLUP, and lower for the GBLUP method. Hence, SSRR-BLUP could be used when the number of genotyped animals is large, avoiding the construction of the inverse genomic relationship matrix. Adding information on DMI from different lactations in the reference population gave higher accuracies in comparison when only lactation 1 was included. Finally, no benefit was obtained by adding information on predictor traits to the reference population when DMI was already included. However, in the absence of DMI records, having records on FPCM and LW from different lactations is a good way to obtain EBV with a relatively good accuracy.     

Strategies for implementing genomic selection for feed efficiency in dairy cattle breeding schemes

Alternative genomic selection and traditional BLUP breeding schemes were compared for the genetic improvement of feed efficiency in simulated Norwegian Red dairy cattle populations. The change in genetic gain over time and achievable selection accuracy were studied for milk yield and residual feed intake, as a measure of feed efficiency. When including feed efficiency in genomic BLUP schemes, it was possible to achieve high selection accuracies for genomic selection, and all genomic BLUP schemes gave better genetic gain for feed efficiency than BLUP using a pedigree relationship matrix. However, introducing a second trait in the breeding goal caused a reduction in the genetic gain for milk yield. When using contracted test herds with genotyped and feed efficiency recorded cows as a reference population, adding an additional 4,000 new heifers per year to the reference population gave accuracies that were comparable to a male reference population that used progeny testing with 250 daughters per sire. When the test herd consisted of 500 or 1,000 cows, lower genetic gain was found than using progeny test records to update the reference population. It was concluded that to improve difficult to record traits, the use of contracted test herds that had additional recording (e.g., measurements required to calculate feed efficiency) is a viable option, possibly through international collaborations.     

Technical note: Automatic scaling in single-step genomic BLUP

Single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) requires compatibility between genomic and pedigree relationships for unbiased and accurate predictions. Scaling the genomic relationship matrix (G) to have the same averages as the pedigree relationship matrix (i.e., scaling by averages) is one way to ensure compatibility. This requires computing both relationship matrices, calculating averages, and changing G, whereas only the inverses of those matrices are needed in the mixed model equations. Therefore, the compatibility process can add extra computing burden. In the single-step Bayesian regression, the scaling is done by including a mean (μ_g) as a fixed effect in the model. The parameter μ_g can be interpreted as the average of the breeding values of the genotyped animals. In this study, such scaling, called automatic, was implemented in ssGBLUP via Quaas-Pollak transformation of the inverse of the relationship matrix used in ssGBLUP (H), which combines the inverses of the pedigree and genomic relationship matrices. Comparisons involved a simulated data set, and the genomic relationship matrix was computed using different allele frequencies either from the current population (i.e., realized allele frequencies), equal among all the loci, or from the base population. For all of the scenarios, we computed bias [defined as the average difference between true breeding values (TBV) and genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV)], accuracy (defined as the correlation between TBV and GEBV), and dispersion (defined as the regression coefficient of GEBV on TBV). With no scaling, the bias expressed in terms of genetic standard deviations was 0.86, 0.64, and 0.58 with realized, equal, and base population allele frequencies, respectively. With scaling by averages, which is currently used in ssGBLUP, bias was 0.07, 0.08, and 0.03, respectively. With automatic scaling, bias was 0.18 regardless of allele frequencies. Accuracies were similar among scaling methods, but about 0.1 lower in the scenario without scaling. The GEBV were more inflated without any scaling, whereas the automatic scaling performed similarly to the scaling by averages. The average dispersion for those methods was 0.94. When μ_g was treated as random, with the variance equal to differences between pedigree and genomic relationships, the bias was the same as with the scaling by averages. The automatic scaling is biased, especially when μ_g is treated as a fixed effect. The bias may be small in real data with fewer generations, when traits are undergoing weak selection, or when the number of genotyped animals is large.     

Breeding value reliabilities for multiple-trait single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor

Approximate multistep methods to calculate reliabilities for estimated breeding values in large genetic evaluations were developed for single-trait (ST-R²A) and multitrait (MT-R²A) single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) models. First, a traditional animal model was used to estimate the amount of nongenomic information for the genotyped animals. Second, this information was used with genomic data in a genomic BLUP model (genomic BLUP/SNP-BLUP) to approximate the total amount of information and ssGBLUP reliabilities for the genotyped animals. Finally, reliabilities for the nongenotyped animals were calculated using a traditional animal model where the increased information due to genomic data for the genotyped animals is accounted for by including pseudo-record counts for the genotyped animals. The approaches were tested using a multiple-trait ssGBLUP model on 2 data sets. The first data set (data 1) was small enough such that exact ssGBLUP model reliabilities could be computed by inversion and compared with the approximation method reliabilities. Data 1 had 46,535 first-, 35,290 second-, and 23,780 third-lactation 305-d milk yield records from 47,124 Finnish Red dairy cows. The pedigree comprised 64,808 animals, of which 19,757 were genotyped. We examined the efficiency of the MT-R²A approximation on a large data set (data 2) derived from the joint Nordic (Danish, Finnish, and Swedish) Holstein dairy cattle data. Data 2 had 17.8 million 305-d milk records from 8.3 million cows and first 3 lactations. The pedigree had 11 million animals of which 274,145 were genotyped on 46,342 SNP markers. For data 1, correlations between the exact ssGBLUP model and the ST-R²A for the genotyped (nongenotyped) animals were 0.995 (0.987), 0.965 (0.984), and 0.950 (0.983) for first, second, and third lactation, respectively. Correspondingly, correlations between exact ssGBLUP reliabilities and MT-R²A for the genotyped (nongenotyped) animals were 0.995 (0.993), 0.992 (0.991), and 0.990 (0.990) for first, second, and third lactation, respectively. The regression coefficients (b₁) of ssGBLUP reliability on ST-R²A for the genotyped (nongenotyped) animals ranged from 0.87 (0.94) for first lactation to 0.68 (0.93) for third lactation, whereas for MT-R²A they were between 0.91 (0.99) for first lactation to 0.89 (0.99) for third lactation. Correspondingly, the intercepts varied from 0.11 (0.05) to 0.3 (0.06) for ST-R²A and from 0.06 (0.01) to 0.07 (0.02) for MT-R²A. The computing time for the approximation method was approximately 12% of that required by the direct exact approach. In conclusion, the developed approximate approach allows calculating estimated breeding value reliabilities in the ssGBLUP model even for large data sets.     

Technical note: Genetic groups in single-step single nucleotide polymorphism best linear unbiased predictor

Genetic groups, also called unknown or phantom parents groups, are often used in dairy cattle genetic evaluations to account for selection that cannot be accounted for by known genetic relationships. With the advent of genomic evaluations, the theory of genetic groups was extended to the so-called single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). In short, genetic groups can be fitted in ssGBLUP through regression effects, or by including them in the pedigree and computing the adequate combined pedigree and genomic relationship matrix. In this study, we applied the so-called Quaas and Pollak transformation to a system of equations for single-step SNP BLUP (ssSNPBLUP), such that genetic groups can thereafter be included in the pedigree. The example in this study showed that including the genetic groups in the pedigree for ssSNPBLUP allowed reduced memory burden and computational costs in comparison to genetic groups fitted as covariates.     

Genetic components of milk Fourier-transform infrared spectra used to predict breeding values for milk composition and quality traits in dairy goats

The usual practice today is that milk component phenotypes are predicted using Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectra and they are then, together with pedigree information, used in BLUP for calculation of individual estimated breeding values. Here, this is referred to as the indirect prediction (IP) approach. An alternative approach—a direct prediction (DP) method—is proposed, where genetic analyses are directly conducted on the milk FTIR spectral variables. Breeding values of all derived milk traits (protein, fat, fatty acid composition, and coagulation properties, among others) can then be predicted as traits correlated only to the genetic information of the spectra. For the DP, no need exists to predict the phenotypes before calculating breeding values for each of the traits—the genetic analysis is done once for the spectra, and is applicable to all traits derived from the spectra. The aim of the study was to compare the effects of DP and IP of milk composition and quality traits on prediction error variance (PEV) and genetic gain. A data set containing 27,927 milk FTIR spectral observations and milk composition phenotypes (fat, lactose, and protein) belonging to 14,869 goats of 271 herds was used for training and evaluating models. Partial least squares regression was used for calibrating prediction models for fat, protein, and lactose percentages. Restricted maximum likelihood was used to estimate variance components of the spectral variables after principal components analysis was applied to reduce the spectral dimension. Estimated breeding values were predicted for fat, lactose, and protein percentages using DP and IP methods. The DP approach reduced the mean PEV by 3.73, 4.07, and 7.04% for fat, lactose, and protein percentages, respectively, compared with the IP method. Given the reduction in PEV, relative genetic gains were 2.99, 2.78, and 4.85% for fat, lactose, and protein percentages, respectively. We concluded that more accurate estimated breeding values could be found using genetic components of milk FTIR spectra compared with single-trait animal model analyses on phenotypes predicted from the spectra separately. The potential and application is not only limited to milk FTIR spectra, but could also be extended to any spectroscopy techniques implemented in other species and for other traits.     

Alternative SNP weighting for single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor evaluation of stature in US Holsteins in the presence of selected sequence variants

Causal variants inferred from sequence data analysis are expected to increase accuracy of genomic selection. In this work we evaluated the gain in reliability of genomic predictions, for stature in US Holsteins, when adding selected sequence variants to a pre-existent SNP chip. Two prediction methods were tested: de-regressed proofs assuming heterogeneous (genomic BLUP; GBLUP) residual variances and by single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) using actual phenotypes. Phenotypic data included 3,999,631 records for stature on 3,027,304 Holstein cows. Genotypes on 54,087 SNP markers (54k) were available for 26,877 bulls. Additionally, 16,648 selected sequence variants were combined with the 54k markers, for a total of 70,735 (70k) markers. In all methods, SNP in the genomic relationship matrix (G) were unweighted or weighted iteratively, with weights derived either by SNP effects squared or by a nonlinear method that resembles BayesA (nonlinear A). Reliability of genomic predictions were obtained by cross validation. With unweighted G derived from 54k markers, the reliabilities (× 100) were 72.4 for GBLUP and 75.3 for ssGBLUP. With unweighted G derived from 70k markers, the reliabilities were 73.4 and 76.0, respectively. Weighting by nonlinear A changed reliabilities to 73.3, and 75.9, respectively. Addition of selected sequence variants had a small effect on reliabilities. Weighting by quadratic functions reduced reliabilities. Weighting by nonlinear A increased reliabilities for GBLUP but had only a small effect in ssGBLUP. Reliabilities for direct genomic values extracted from ssGBLUP using unweighted G with 54k were higher than reliabilities by any GBLUP. Thus, ssGBLUP seems to capture more information than GBLUP and there is less room for extra reliability. Improvements in GBLUP may be because the weights in G change the covariance structure, which can explain a proportion of the variance that is accounted for when a heterogeneous residual variance is assumed by considering a different number of daughters per bull.     

Accuracy of breeding values in small genotyped populations using different sources of external information—A simulation study

Genetically linked small and large dairy cattle populations were simulated to test the effect of different sources of information from foreign populations on the accuracy of predicting breeding values for young animals in a small population. A large dairy cattle population (P_L) with >20 generations was simulated, and a small subpopulation (P_S) with 3 generations was formed as a related population, including phenotypes and genomic information. Predicted breeding values for young animals in the small population were calculated using BLUP and single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) in 4 different scenarios: (S1) 3,166 phenotypes, 22,855 pedigree animals, and 1,000 to 6,000 genotypes for P_S; (S2) S1 plus genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) for 4,475 sires from P_L as external information; (S3) S1 plus 221,580 phenotypes, 402,829 pedigree animals, and 53,558 genotypes for P_L; and (S4) single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) effects calculated based on P_L data. The ability to predict true breeding value was assessed in the youngest third of the genotyped animals in the small population. When data only from the small population were used and 1,000 animals were genotyped, the accuracy of GEBV was only 1 point greater than the estimated breeding value accuracy (0.32 vs. 0.31). Adding external GEBV for sires from P_L did not considerably increase accuracy (0.33 vs. 0.32 in S1). Combining phenotypes, pedigree, and genotypes for P_S and P_L was beneficial for predicting accuracy of GEBV in the small population, and the prediction accuracy of GEBV in this scenario was 0.38 compared with 0.31 from estimated breeding values. When SNP effects from P_L were used to predict GEBV for young genotyped animals from P_S, accuracy was greatest (0.56). With 6,000 genotyped animal in P_S, accuracy was greatest (0.61) with the combined populations. In a small population with few genotypes, the highest accuracy of evaluation may be obtained by using SNP effects derived from a related large population.     

Validation of single-step genomic BLUP random regression test-day models and SNP effects analysis on milk yield in French Saanen goats

The shape of the lactation curve is linked to an animal's health, feed requirements, and milk production throughout the year. Random regression models (RRM) are widely used for genetic evaluation of total milk production throughout the lactation and for milk yield persistency. Genomic information used with the single-step genomic BLUP method (ssGBLUP) substantially improves the accuracy of genomic prediction of breeding values in the main dairy cattle breeds. The aim of this study was to implement an RRM using ssGBLUP for milk yield in Saanen dairy goats in France. The data set consisted of 7,904,246 test-day records from 1,308,307 lactations of Saanen goats collected in France between 2000 and 2017. The performance of this type of evaluation was assessed by applying a validation step with data targeting candidate bucks. The model was compared with a nongenomic evaluation and a traditional evaluation that use cumulated performance throughout the lactation model (LM). The incorporation of genomic information increased correlations between daughter yield deviations (DYD) and estimated breeding values (EBV) obtained with a partial data set for candidate bucks. The LM and the RRM had similar correlation between DYD and EBV. However, the RRM reduced overestimation of EBV and improved the slope of the regression of DYD on EBV obtained at birth. This study shows that a genomic evaluation from a ssGBLUP RRM is possible in dairy goats in France and that RRM performance is comparable to a LM but with the additional benefit of a genomic evaluation of persistency. Variance of adjacent SNPs was studied with LM and RRM following the ssGBLUP. Both approaches converged on approximately the same regions explaining more than 1% of total variance. Regions associated with persistency were also found.     

Controlling bias in genomic breeding values for young genotyped bulls

The objectives of this study were to investigate bias in genomic predictions for dairy cattle and to find a practical approach to reduce the bias. The simulated data included phenotypes, pedigrees, and genotypes, mimicking a dairy cattle population (i.e., cows with phenotypes and bulls with no phenotypes) and assuming selection by breeding values or no selection. With the simulated data, genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were calculated with a single-step genomic BLUP and compared with true breeding values. Phenotypes and genotypes were simulated in 10 generations and in the last 4 generations, respectively. Phenotypes in the last generation were removed to predict breeding values for those individuals using only genomic and pedigree information. Complete pedigrees and incomplete pedigrees with 50% missing dams were created to construct the pedigree-based relationship matrix with and without inbreeding. With missing dams, unknown parent groups (UPG) were assigned in relationship matrices. Regression coefficients (b₁) and coefficients of determination (R²) of true breeding values on (G)EBV were calculated to investigate inflation and accuracy in GEBV for genotyped animals, respectively. In addition to the simulation study, 18 linear type traits of US Holsteins were examined. For the 18 type traits, b₁ and R² of GEBV with full data sets on GEBV with partial data sets for young genotyped bulls were calculated. The results from the simulation study indicated inflation in GEBV for genotyped males that were evaluated with only pedigree and genomic information under BLUP selection. However, when UPG for only pedigree-based relationships were included, the inflation was reduced, accuracy was highest, and genetic trends had no bias. For the linear type traits, when UPG for only pedigree-based relationships were included, the results were generally in agreement with those from the simulation study, implying less bias in genetic trends. However, when including no UPG, UPG in pedigree-based relationships, or UPG in genomic relationships, inflation and accuracy in GEBV were similar. The results from the simulation and type traits suggest that UPG must be defined accurately to be estimable and inbreeding should be included in pedigree-based relationships. In dairy cattle, known pedigree information with inbreeding and estimable UPG plays an important role in improving compatibility between pedigree-based and genomic relationship matrices, resulting in more reliable genomic predictions.