Efficient use of genomic information for sustainable genetic improvement in small cattle populations

In this study, we compared genetic gain, genetic variation, and the efficiency of converting variation into gain under different genomic selection scenarios with truncation or optimum contribution selection in a small dairy population by simulation. Breeding programs have to maximize genetic gain but also ensure sustainability by maintaining genetic variation. Numerous studies have shown that genomic selection increases genetic gain. Although genomic selection is a well-established method, small populations still struggle with choosing the most sustainable strategy to adopt this type of selection. We developed a simulator of a dairy population and simulated a model after the Slovenian Brown Swiss population with ～10,500 cows. We compared different truncation selection scenarios by varying (1) the method of sire selection and their use on cows or bull-dams, and (2) selection intensity and the number of years a sire is in use. Furthermore, we compared different optimum contribution selection scenarios with optimization of sire selection and their usage. We compared scenarios in terms of genetic gain, selection accuracy, generation interval, genetic and genic variance, rate of coancestry, effective population size, and conversion efficiency. The results showed that early use of genomically tested sires increased genetic gain compared with progeny testing, as expected from changes in selection accuracy and generation interval. A faster turnover of sires from year to year and higher intensity increased the genetic gain even further but increased the loss of genetic variation per year. Although maximizing intensity gave the lowest conversion efficiency, faster turnover of sires gave an intermediate conversion efficiency. The largest conversion efficiency was achieved with the simultaneous use of genomically and progeny-tested sires that were used over several years. Compared with truncation selection, optimizing sire selection and their usage increased the conversion efficiency by achieving either comparable genetic gain for a smaller loss of genetic variation or higher genetic gain for a comparable loss of genetic variation. Our results will help breeding organizations implement sustainable genomic selection.     

Use of female information in dairy cattle genomic breeding programs

Genomic selection has the potential to increase the accuracy of selection and, therefore, genetic gain, as well as reducing the rate of inbreeding, yet few studies have evaluated the potential benefit of the contribution of females in genomic selection programs. The objective of this study was to determine the effect on genetic gain, accuracy of selection, generation interval, and inbreeding, of including female genotypes in a genomic selection breeding program. A population of approximately 3,500 females and 500 males born annually was simulated and split into an elite and commercial tier representation of the Irish national herd. Several alternative breeding schemes were evaluated to quantify the potential benefit of female genomic information within dairy breeding schemes. Results showed that the inclusion of female phenotypic and genomic information can lead to a 3-fold increase in the rate of genetic gain compared with a traditional BLUP breeding program and decrease the generation interval of the males by 3.8 yr, while maintaining a reasonable rate of inbreeding. The accuracy of the selected males was increased by 73% in the final 3 yr of the genomic schemes compared with the traditional BLUP scheme. The results of this study have several implications for national breeding schemes. Although an investment in genotyping a large population of animals is required, these costs can be offset by the greater genetic gain achievable through the increased accuracy of selection and decreased generation intervals associated with genomic selection.     

Optimal strategies for the use of genomic selection in dairy cattle breeding programs

The objective of the present study was to conduct a stochastic simulation study on the possible benefits of an application of genomic selection in dairy cattle breeding programs according to a variety of selection schemes. In addition, the heritability of the trait in question, the accuracy of genomic breeding values, and the number of animals to be genotyped were varied. Specifically, the question of genotyping males, females, or both, was addressed. Selection schemes were compared with a young bull breeding program. The main criterion for comparison was the average of true breeding values of selected young males to be used as replacements for artificial insemination bulls. Stochastic simulations were run with 50 repetitions each to generate individuals with phenotypes, breeding values estimated by BLUP, and true breeding values. Genomic breeding values were generated from true breeding values with defined accuracy. Examined scenarios included a group of selection schemes that featured genotyping of parents of future bulls only. Such schemes can be viewed as improvements of young bull programs, and they were found to be competitive with or superior to a classical young bull program. However, a genomic breeding program usually involves at least genotyping young male candidates. A second group of selection schemes reflected this requirement. Scenarios in this group were found to be superior over the young bull program by 1.0 to 1.2 standard deviations of the average true breeding value of young male candidates. Within this group of scenarios, one scheme referred to an ideal situation under which genotypes for male calves were available without limitation. Using the average of true breeding values as the criterion for comparison, this idealistic scenario was competitive with other scenarios only if the reliability of genomic breeding values was larger than 0.50. Conventionally, not all males available will have genotypes, and the 2 most promising scenarios included a preselection step for dams of future bulls. This preselection step can be based on conventional BLUP estimated breeding values for bull dams, because differences with a scheme under which both parents and the resulting male offspring are genotyped were marginal. Genotyping of young male candidates should be the focus of activities of today's breeding organizations.     

Genetic evaluation of test-day milk yields from smallholder dairy production systems in Kenya using genomic relationships

Efforts to improve dairy production in smallholder farming systems of East Africa over the past decade have had limited impact because of the lack of records on performance to guide targeted breeding programs. Estimates of genetic parameters in these systems are lacking. Using data generated through a project (“Germplasm for Dairy Development in East Africa”) in Kenya and a genomic relationship matrix from genotypic records, we examined the potential impact of different models handling contemporary groups or herd effects on estimates of genetic parameters using a fixed regression model (FRM) for test-day (TD) milk yields, and the covariance structure for TD milk yield at various stages of lactation for animals using a random regression model (RRM). Models in which herd groups were defined using production levels derived from the data fitted the data better than those in which herds were grouped depending on management practices or were random. Lactation curves obtained for animals under different production categories did not display the typical peak yield characteristic of improved dairy systems in developed countries. Heritability estimates for TD milk yields using the FRM varied greatly with the definition of contemporary herd groups, ranging from 0.05 ± 0.03 to 0.27 ± 0.05 (mean ± standard error). The analysis using the RRM fitted the data better than the FRM. The heritability estimates for specific TD yields obtained by the RRM were higher than those obtained by the FRM. Genetic correlations between TD yields were high and positive for measures within short consecutive intervals but decreased as the intervals between TD increased beyond 60 d and became negative with intervals of more than 5 mo. The magnitude of the genetic correlation estimates among TD records indicates that using TD milk records beyond a 60-d interval as repeated measures of the same trait for genetic evaluation of animals on smallholder farms would not be optimal. Although each individual smallholder farmer retains only a few animals, using the genomic relationship between animals to link the large number of farmers operating under specified environments provides a sufficiently large herd-group for which a breeding program could be developed.     

Mating allocations in Nordic Red Dairy Cattle using genomic information

In this study, we compared mating allocations in Nordic Red Dairy Cattle using genomic information. We used linear programming to optimize different economic scores within each herd, considering genetic level, semen cost, the economic impact of recessive genetic defects, and genetic relationships. We selected 9,841 genotyped females born in Denmark, Finland, or Sweden in 2019 for mating allocations. We used 2 different pedigree relationship coefficients, the first tracing the pedigree 3 generations back from the parents of the potential mating and the second based on all available pedigree information. We used 3 different genomic relationship coefficients, 1 SNP-by-SNP genomic relationship and 2 based on shared genomic segments. We found high correlations (≥0.83) between the pedigree and genomic relationship measures. The mating results showed that it was possible to reduce the different genetic relationships between parents with minimal effect on genetic level. Including the cost of known recessive genetic defects eliminated expression of genetic defects. It was possible to reduce genomic relationships between parents with pedigree measures, but it was best done with genomic measures. Linear programming maximized the economic score for all herds studied within seconds, which means that it is suitable for implementation in mating software to be used by advisors and farmers.     

Mating programs including genomic relationships and dominance effects

Computerized mating programs using genomic information are needed by breed associations, artificial-insemination organizations, and on-farm software providers, but such software is already challenged by the size of the relationship matrix. As of October 2012, over 230,000 Holsteins obtained genomic predictions in North America. Efficient methods of storing, computing, and transferring genomic relationships from a central database to customers via a web query were developed for approximately 165,000 genotyped cows and the subset of 1,518 bulls whose semen was available for purchase at that time. This study, utilizing 3 breeds, investigated differences in sire selection, methods of assigning mates, the use of genomic or pedigree relationships, and the effect of including dominance effects in a mating program. For both Jerseys and Holsteins, selection and mating programs were tested using the top 50 marketed bulls for genomic and traditional lifetime net merit as well as 50 randomly selected bulls. The 500 youngest genotyped cows in the largest herd in each breed were assigned mates of the same breed with limits of 10 cows per bull and 1 bull per cow (only 79 cows and 8 bulls for Brown Swiss). A dominance variance of 4.1 and 3.7% was estimated for Holsteins and Jerseys using 45,187 markers and management group deviation for milk yield. Sire selection was identified as the most important component of improving expected progeny value, followed by managing inbreeding and then inclusion of dominance. The respective percentage gains for milk yield in this study were 64, 27, and 9, for Holsteins and 73, 20, and 7 for Jerseys. The linear programming method of assigning a mate outperformed sequential selection by reducing genomic or pedigree inbreeding by 0.86 to 1.06 and 0.93 to 1.41, respectively. Use of genomic over pedigree relationship information provided a larger decrease in expected progeny inbreeding and thus greater expected progeny value. Based on lifetime net merit, the economic value of using genomic relationships was >$3 million per year for Holsteins when applied to all genotyped females, assuming that each will provide 1 replacement. Previous mating programs required transferring only a pedigree file to customers, but better service is possible by incorporating genomic relationships, more precise mate allocation, and dominance effects. Economic benefits will continue to grow as more females are genotyped.     

Marker selection and genomic prediction of economically important traits using imputed high-density genotypes for 5 breeds of dairy cattle

Marker sets used in US dairy genomic predictions were previously expanded by including high-density (HD) or sequence markers with the largest effects for Holstein breed only. Other non-Holstein breeds lacked enough HD genotyped animals to be used as a reference population at that time, and thus were not included in the genomic prediction. Recently, numbers of non-Holstein breeds genotyped using HD panels reached an acceptable level for imputation and marker selection, allowing HD genomic prediction and HD marker selection for Holstein plus 4 other breeds. Genotypes for 351,461 Holsteins, 347,570 Jerseys, 42,346 Brown Swiss, 9,364 Ayrshires (including Red dairy cattle), and 4,599 Guernseys were imputed to the HD marker list that included 643,059 SNP. The separate HD reference populations included Illumina BovineHD (San Diego, CA) genotypes for 4,012 Holsteins, 407 Jerseys, 181 Brown Swiss, 527 Ayrshires, and 147 Guernseys. The 643,059 variants included the HD SNP and all 79,254 (80K) genetic markers and QTL used in routine national genomic evaluations. Before imputation, approximately 91 to 97% of genotypes were unknown for each breed; after imputation, 1.1% of Holstein, 3.2% of Jersey, 6.7% of Brown Swiss, 4.8% of Ayrshire, and 4.2% of Guernsey alleles remained unknown due to lower density haplotypes that had no matching HD haplotype. The higher remaining missing rates in non-Holstein breeds are mainly due to fewer HD genotyped animals in the imputation reference populations. Allele effects for up to 39 traits were estimated separately within each breed using phenotypic reference populations that included up to 6,157 Jersey males and 110,130 Jersey females. Correlations of HD with 80K genomic predictions for young animals averaged 0.986, 0.989, 0.985, 0.992, and 0.978 for Jersey, Ayrshire, Brown Swiss, Guernsey, and Holstein breeds, respectively. Correlations were highest for yield traits (about 0.991) and lowest for foot angle and rear legs–side view (0.981and 0.982, respectively). Some HD effects were more than twice as large as the largest 80K SNP effect, and HD markers had larger effects than nearby 80K markers for many breed-trait combinations. Previous studies selected and included markers with large effects for Holstein traits; the newly selected HD markers should also improve non-Holstein and crossbred genomic predictions and were added to official US genomic predictions in April 2020.     

A comparison of dairy cattle breeding designs that use genomic selection

Different dairy cattle breeding schemes were compared using stochastic simulations, in which the accuracy of the genomic breeding values was dependent on the structure of the breeding scheme, through the availability of new genotyped animals with phenotypic information. Most studies that predict the gain by implementing genomic selection apply a deterministic approach that requires assumptions about the accuracy of the genomic breeding values. The achieved genetic gain, when genomic selection was the only selection method to directly identify elite sires for widespread use and progeny testing was omitted, was compared with using genomic selection for preselection of young bulls for progeny testing and to a conventional progeny test scheme. The rate of inbreeding could be reduced by selecting more sires every year. Selecting 20 sires directly on their genomic breeding values gave a higher genetic gain than any progeny testing scheme, with the same rate of inbreeding as the schemes that used genomic selection for preselection of bulls before progeny testing. The genomic selection breeding schemes could reduce the rate of inbreeding and still increase genetic gain, compared with the conventional breeding scheme. Since progeny testing is expensive, the breeding scheme omitting the progeny test will be the cheapest one. Keeping the progeny test and use of genomic selection for preselection still has some advantages. It gives higher accuracy of breeding values and does not require a complete restructuring of the breeding program. Comparing at the same rate of inbreeding, using genomic selection for elite sire selection only gives a 13% increase in genetic gain, compared with using genomic selection for preselection. One way to reduce the costs of the scheme where genomic selection was used for preselection is to reduce the number of progeny tested bulls. This was here achieved without getting lower genetic gain or a higher rate of inbreeding.     

Accuracy of direct genomic values derived from imputed single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes in Jersey cattle

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the predictive ability of direct genomic values for economically important dairy traits when genotypes at some single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci were imputed rather than measured directly. Genotypic data consisted of 42,552 SNP genotypes for each of 1,762 Jersey sires. Phenotypic data consisted of predicted transmitting abilities (PTA) for milk yield, protein percentage, and daughter pregnancy rate from May 2006 for 1,446 sires in the training set and from April 2009 for 316 sires in the testing set. The SNP effects were estimated using the Bayesian least absolute selection and shrinkage operator (LASSO) method with data of sires in the training set, and direct genomic values (DGV) for sires in the testing set were computed by multiplying these estimates by corresponding genotype dosages for sires in the testing set. The mean correlation across traits between DGV (before progeny testing) and PTA (after progeny testing) for sires in the testing set was 70.6% when all 42,552 SNP genotypes were used. When genotypes for 93.1, 96.6, 98.3, or 99.1% of loci were masked and subsequently imputed in the testing set, mean correlations across traits between DGV and PTA were 68.5, 64.8, 54.8, or 43.5%, respectively. When genotypes were also masked and imputed for a random 50% of sires in the training set, mean correlations across traits between DGV and PTA were 65.7, 63.2, 53.9, or 49.5%, respectively. Results of this study indicate that if a suitable reference population with high-density genotypes is available, a low-density chip comprising 3,000 equally spaced SNP may provide approximately 95% of the predictive ability observed with the BovineSNP50 Beadchip (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA) in Jersey cattle. However, if fewer than 1,500 SNP are genotyped, the accuracy of DGV may be limited by errors in the imputed genotypes of selection candidates.     

On the limited increase in validation reliability using high-density genotypes in genomic best linear unbiased prediction: Observations from Fleckvieh cattle

This study investigated reliability of genomic predictions using medium-density (40,089; 50K) or high-density (HD; 388,951) marker sets. We developed an approximate method to test differences in validation reliability for significance. Model-based reliability and the effect of HD genotypes on inflation of predictions were analyzed additionally. Genomic breeding values were predicted for at least 1,321 validation bulls based on phenotypes and genotypes of at least 5,324 calibration bulls by means of a linear model in milk, fat, and protein yield; somatic cell score; milkability; muscling; udder, feet, and legs score as well as stature. In total, 1,485 bulls were actually HD genotyped and HD genotypes of the other animals were imputed from 50K genotypes using FImpute software. Validation reliability was measured as the coefficient of determination of the weighted regression of daughter yield deviations on predicted breeding values divided by the reliability of daughter yield deviations and inflation was evaluated by the slope of this regression. Model-based reliability was calculated from the model. Distributions for validation reliability of 50K markers were derived by repeated sampling of 50,000-marker samples from HD to test differences in validation reliability statistically. Additionally, the benefit of HD genotypes in validation reliability was tested by repeated sampling of validation groups and calculation of the difference in validation reliability between HD and 50K genotypes for the sampled groups of bulls. The mean benefit in validation reliability of HD genotypes was 0.015 compared with real 50K genotypes and 0.028 compared with 50K samples from HD affected by imputation error and was significant for all traits. The model-based reliability was, on average, 0.036 lower and the regression coefficient was 0.036 closer to the expected value with HD genotypes. The observed gain in validation reliability with HD genotypes was similar to expectations based on the number of markers and the effective number of segregating chromosome segments. Sampling error in the marker-based relationship coefficients causing overestimation of the model-based reliability was smaller with HD genotypes. Inflation of the genomic predictions was reduced with HD genotypes, accordingly. Similar effects on model-based reliability and inflation, but not on the validation reliability, were obtained by shrinkage estimation of the realized relationship matrix from 50K genotypes.     

The feasibility of using low-density marker panels for genotype imputation and genomic prediction of crossbred dairy cattle of East Africa

Cost-effective high-density (HD) genotypes of livestock species can be obtained by genotyping a proportion of the population using a HD panel and the remainder using a cheaper low-density panel, and then imputing the missing genotypes that are not directly assayed in the low-density panel. The efficacy of genotype imputation can largely be affected by the structure and history of the specific target population and it should be checked before incorporating imputation in routine genotyping practices. Here, we investigated the efficacy of imputation in crossbred dairy cattle populations of East Africa using 4 different commercial single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) panels, 3 reference populations, and 3 imputation algorithms. We found that Minimac and a reference population, which included a mixture of crossbred and ancestral purebred animals, provided the highest imputation accuracy compared with other scenarios of imputation. The accuracies of imputation, measured as the correlation between real and imputed genotypes averaged across SNP, were around 0.76 and 0.94 for 7K and 40K SNP, respectively, when imputed up to a 770K panel. We also presented a method to maximize the imputation accuracy of low-density panels, which relies on the pairwise (co)variances between SNP and the minor allele frequency of SNP. The performance of the developed method was tested in a 5-fold cross-validation process where various densities of SNP were selected using the (co)variance method and also by alternative SNP selection methods and then imputed up to the HD panel. The (co)variance method provided the highest imputation accuracies at almost all marker densities, with accuracies being up to 0.19 higher than the random selection of SNP. The accuracies of imputation from 7K and 40K panels selected using the (co)variance method were around 0.80 and 0.94, respectively. The presented method also achieved higher accuracy of genomic prediction at lower densities of selected SNP. The squared correlation between genomic breeding values estimated using imputed genotypes and those from the real 770K HD panel was 0.95 when the accuracy of imputation was 0.64. The presented method for SNP selection is straightforward in its application and can ensure high accuracies in genotype imputation of crossbred dairy populations in East Africa.     

Short communication: The role of genotypes from animals without phenotypes in single-step genomic evaluations

In a 2-step genomic system, genotypes of animals without phenotypes do not influence genomic prediction of other animals, but that might not be the case in single-step systems. We investigated the effects of including genotypes from culled bulls on the reliability of genomic predictions from single-step evaluations. Four scenarios with a constant amount of phenotypic information and increasing numbers of genotypes from culled bulls were simulated and compared with respect to prediction reliability. With increasing numbers of genotyped culled bulls, there was a corresponding increase in prediction reliability. For instance, in our simulation scenario the reliability for selection candidates was twice as large when all culled bulls from the last 4 generations were included in the analysis. Single-step evaluations imply the imputation of all nongenotyped animals in the pedigree. We showed that this imputation was increasingly more accurate as increasingly more genotypic information from the culled bulls was taken into account. This resulted in higher prediction reliabilities. The extent of the benefit from including genotypes from culled bulls might be more relevant for small populations with low levels of reliabilities.     

Invited review: A perspective on the future of genomic selection in dairy cattle

Genomic evaluation has been successfully implemented in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, France, the Netherlands, Germany, and the Scandinavian countries. Adoption of this technology in the major dairy producing countries has led to significant changes in the worldwide dairy industry. Gradual elimination of the progeny test system has led to a reduction in the number of sires with daughter records and fewer genetic ties between years. As genotyping costs decrease, the number of cows genotyped will continue to increase, and these records will become the basic data used to compute genomic evaluations, most likely via application of “single-step” methodologies. Although genomic selection has been successful in increasing rates of genetic gain, we still know very little about the genetic architecture of quantitative variation. Apparently, a very large number of genes affect nearly all economic traits, in accordance with the infinitesimal model for quantitative traits. Less emphasis in selection goals will be placed on milk production traits, and more on health, reproduction, and efficiency traits and on environmentally friendly production with reduced waste and gas emission. Genetic variance for economic traits is maintained by the increase in frequency of rare alleles, new mutations, and changes in selection goals and management. Thus, it is unlikely that a selection plateau will be reached in the near future.     

Differences among methods to validate genomic evaluations for dairy cattle

Two methods of testing predictions from genomic evaluations were investigated. Data used were from the August 2006 and April 2010 official USDA genetic evaluations of dairy cattle. The training data set consisted of both cows and bulls that were proven (had own or daughter information) as of August 2006 and included 8,022, 1,959, and 1,056 Holsteins, Jerseys, and Brown Swiss, respectively. The validation data set consisted of bulls that were unproven as of August 2006 and were proven by April 2010 with 2,653, 411, and 132 Holsteins, Jerseys, and Brown Swiss for the production traits. Method 1 used the training animal's predicted transmitting ability (PTA) from August of 2006. Method 2 used the training animal's April 2010 PTA to estimate single nucleotide polymorphism effects. Both methods were tested using several regressions with the same validation animals. In both cases, the validation animals were tested using the deregressed April 2010 PTA. All traits that had genomic evaluations from the official USDA April 2010 genetic evaluations were tested. Results included bias, differences from expected regressions (calculated using selection intensities), and the coefficients of determination. The genomic information increased the predictive ability for most of the traits in all of the breeds. The 2 methods of testing resulted in some differences that would affect interpretation of results. The coefficient of determination was higher for all traits using method 2. This was the expected result as the data were not independent because evaluations of the validation bulls contributed to their sires’ evaluations. The regression coefficients from method 2 were often higher than the regression coefficients from method 1. Many traits had regression coefficients that were higher than 2 standard deviations from the expected regressions when using method 2. This was partially due to the lack of independence of the training and validation data sets. Most traits did have some level of bias in the prediction equations, regardless of breed. The use of method 1 made it possible to evaluate the increased accuracy in proven first-crop bull evaluations by using genomic information. Proven first-crop bulls had an increase in accuracy from the addition of genomic information. It is advised to use method 1 for validation of genomic evaluations.     

The effect of using cow genomic information on accuracy and bias of genomic breeding values in a simulated Holstein dairy cattle population

Using cow data in the training population is attractive as a way to mitigate bias due to highly selected training bulls and to implement genomic selection for countries with no or limited proven bull data. However, one potential issue with cow data is a bias due to the preferential treatment. The objectives of this study were to (1) investigate the effect of including cow genotype and phenotype data into the training population on accuracy and bias of genomic predictions and (2) assess the effect of preferential treatment for different proportions of elite cows. First, a 4-pathway Holstein dairy cattle population was simulated for 2 traits with low (0.05) and moderate (0.3) heritability. Then different numbers of cows (0, 2,500, 5,000, 10,000, 15,000, or 20,000) were randomly selected and added to the training group composed of different numbers of top bulls (0, 2,500, 5,000, 10,000, or 15,000). Reliability levels of de-regressed estimated breeding values for training cows and bulls were 30 and 75% for traits with low heritability and were 60 and 90% for traits with moderate heritability, respectively. Preferential treatment was simulated by introducing upward bias equal to 35% of phenotypic variance to 5, 10, and 20% of elite bull dams in each scenario. Two different validation data sets were considered: (1) all animals in the last generation of both elite and commercial tiers (n = 42,000) and (2) only animals in the last generation of the elite tier (n = 12,000). Adding cow data into the training population led to an increase in accuracy (r) and decrease in bias of genomic predictions in all considered scenarios without preferential treatment. The gain in r was higher for the low heritable trait (from 0.004 to 0.166 r points) compared with the moderate heritable trait (from 0.004 to 0.116 r points). The gain in accuracy in scenarios with a lower number of training bulls was relatively higher (from 0.093 to 0.166 r points) than with a higher number of training bulls (from 0.004 to 0.09 r points). In this study, as expected, the bull-only reference population resulted in higher accuracy compared with the cow-only reference population of the same size. However, the cow reference population might be an option for countries with a small-scale progeny testing scheme or for minor breeds in large counties, and for traits measured only on a small fraction of the population. The inclusion of preferential treatment to 5 to 20% of the elite cows led to an adverse effect on both accuracy and bias of predictions. When preferential treatment was present, random selection of cows did not reduce the effect of preferential treatment.     

A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information

Dense molecular markers are being used in genetic evaluation for parts of the population. This requires a two-step procedure where pseudo-data (for instance, daughter yield deviations) are computed from full records and pedigree data and later used for genomic evaluation. This results in bias and loss of information. One way to incorporate the genomic information into a full genetic evaluation is by modifying the numerator relationship matrix. A naive proposal is to substitute the relationships of genotyped animals with the genomic relationship matrix. However, this results in incoherencies because the genomic relationship matrix includes information on relationships among ancestors and descendants. In other words, using the pedigree-derived covariance between genotyped and ungenotyped individuals, with the pretense that genomic information does not exist, leads to inconsistencies. It is proposed to condition the genetic value of ungenotyped animals on the genetic value of genotyped animals via the selection index (e.g., pedigree information), and then use the genomic relationship matrix for the latter. This results in a joint distribution of genotyped and ungenotyped genetic values, with a pedigree-genomic relationship matrix H. In this matrix, genomic information is transmitted to the covariances among all ungenotyped individuals. The matrix is (semi)positive definite by construction, which is not the case for the naive approach. Numerical examples and alternative expressions are discussed. Matrix H is suitable for iteration on data algorithms that multiply a vector times a matrix, such as preconditioned conjugated gradients.     

Indirect genomic predictions for milk yield in crossbred Holstein-Jersey dairy cattle

The objective of this study was to predict genomic breeding values for milk yield of crossbred dairy cattle under different scenarios using single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). The data set included 13,880,217 milk yield measurements on 6,830,415 cows. Genotypes of 89,558 Holstein, 40,769 Jersey, and 22,373 Holstein-Jersey crossbred animals were used, of which all Holstein, 9,313 Jersey, and 1,667 crossbred animals had phenotypic records. Genotypes were imputed to 45K SNP markers. The SNP effects were estimated from single-breed evaluations for Jersey (JE), Holstein (HO) and crossbreds (CROSS), and multibreed evaluations including all Jersey and Holstein (JE_HO) or approximately equal proportions of Jersey, Holstein, and crossbred animals (MIX). Indirect predictions (IP) of the validation animals (358 crossbred animals with phenotypes excluded from evaluations) were calculated using the resulting SNP effects. Additionally, breed proportions (BP) of crossbred animals were applied as a weight when IP were estimated based on each pure breed. The predictive ability of IP was calculated as the Pearson correlation between IP and phenotypes of the validation animals adjusted for fixed effects in the model. Regression of adjusted phenotypes on IP was used to assess the inflation of IP. The predictive ability of IP for CROSS, JE, HO, JE_HO, and MIX scenario was 0.50, 0.50, 0.47, 0.50, and 0.46, respectively. Using BP was the least successful, with a predictive ability of 0.32. The inflation of the IP for crossbred animals using CROSS, JE, HO, JE_HO, MIX, and BP scenarios were 1.17, 0.65, 0.55, 0.78, 1.00, and 0.85, respectively. The IP of crossbred animals can be predicted using single-step GBLUP under a scenario that includes purebred genotypes.     

Accuracy of genomic predictions in Gyr (Bos indicus) dairy cattle

Genomic selection may accelerate genetic progress in breeding programs of indicine breeds when compared with traditional selection methods. We present results of genomic predictions in Gyr (Bos indicus) dairy cattle of Brazil for milk yield (MY), fat yield (FY), protein yield (PY), and age at first calving using information from bulls and cows. Four different single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chips were studied. Additionally, the effect of the use of imputed data on genomic prediction accuracy was studied. A total of 474 bulls and 1,688 cows were genotyped with the Illumina BovineHD (HD; San Diego, CA) and BovineSNP50 (50K) chip, respectively. Genotypes of cows were imputed to HD using FImpute v2.2. After quality check of data, 496,606 markers remained. The HD markers present on the GeneSeek SGGP-20Ki (15,727; Lincoln, NE), 50K (22,152), and GeneSeek GGP-75Ki (65,018) were subset and used to assess the effect of lower SNP density on accuracy of prediction. Deregressed breeding values were used as pseudophenotypes for model training. Data were split into reference and validation to mimic a forward prediction scheme. The reference population consisted of animals whose birth year was ≤2004 and consisted of either only bulls (TR1) or a combination of bulls and dams (TR2), whereas the validation set consisted of younger bulls (born after 2004). Genomic BLUP was used to estimate genomic breeding values (GEBV) and reliability of GEBV (R²_PEV) was based on the prediction error variance approach. Reliability of GEBV ranged from ∼0.46 (FY and PY) to 0.56 (MY) with TR1 and from 0.51 (PY) to 0.65 (MY) with TR2. When averaged across all traits, R²_PEV were substantially higher (R²_PEV of TR1 = 0.50 and TR2 = 0.57) compared with reliabilities of parent averages (0.35) computed from pedigree data and based on diagonals of the coefficient matrix (prediction error variance approach). Reliability was similar for all the 4 marker panels using either TR1 or TR2, except that imputed HD cow data set led to an inflation of reliability. Reliability of GEBV could be increased by enlarging the limited bull reference population with cow information. A reduced panel of ∼15K markers resulted in reliabilities similar to using HD markers. Reliability of GEBV could be increased by enlarging the limited bull reference population with cow information.     

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.     

Evidence of biases in genetic evaluations due to genomic preselection in dairy cattle

A genomic preselection step of young sires is now often included in dairy cattle breeding schemes. Young sires are selected based on their genomic breeding values. They have better Mendelian sampling contribution so that the assumption of random Mendelian sampling term in genetic evaluations is clearly violated. When these sires and their progeny are evaluated using BLUP, it is feared that estimated breeding values are biased. The effect of genomic selection on genetic evaluations was studied through simulations keeping the structure of the Holstein population in France. The quality of genetic evaluations was assessed by computing bias and accuracy from the difference and correlation between true and estimated breeding values, respectively, and also the mean square error of prediction. Different levels of heritability, selection intensity, and accuracy of genomic evaluation were tested. After only one generation and whatever the scenario, breeding values of preselected young sires and their daughters were significantly underestimated and their accuracy was decreased. Genomic preselection needs to be accounted for in genetic evaluation models.