An overview on quantitative and genomic tools for utilising dominance genetic variation in improving animal production

Agricultural and Food Science

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 188-198

  Mäki Tanila, Asko ^a  

^a FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Animal breeding; Crossbreeding; Genetic improvement; Genomic selection; Heterosis; Inbreeding

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA;

EID: 35348814589     PISSN: 14596067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2137/145960607782219337     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Blott, S., Kim, J.-J., Moisio, S., Schmidt-Kuntzel, A., Cornet, A., Berzi, P., Cambisano, N., Ford, C., Grisart, B., Johnson, D., Karim, L., Simon, P., Snell, R., Spelman, R., Wong, J., Vilkki, J., Georges, M., Farnir, F. & Coppieters, W. 2003. Molecular dissection of a quantitative trait locus: a phenylalanine to tyrosine substitution in the transmembrane domain of the bovine growth hormone receptor is associated with a major effect on milk yield and composition. Genetics 163: 253-266.
2. Charcosset, A. & Essioux, L. 1994. The effect of population structure on the relationship between heterosis and heterozygosity at marker loci. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 89: 336-343.
3. Comstock, R.E., Robinson, H.F. & Harvey, P.H. 1949. A breeding procedure designed to make maximum use of both general and specific combining ability. Journal of American Society of Agronomy 41: 360-367.
4. De Boer, I.J.M. & Hoeschele, I. 1993. Genetic evaluation methods for populations with dominance and inbreeding. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 86: 245-258.
5. De Boer, I.J.M. & Van Arendonk, J.A.M. 1992. Prediction of additive and dominance effects in selected or unselected populations with inbreeding. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 84: 451-459.
6. De Koning, D.-J., Schulman, N., Elo, K., Moisio, S., Kinos, R., Vilkki, J. & Mäki-Tanila, A. 2001. Mapping of multiple quantitative trait loci by simple regression in half-sib designs. Journal of Animal Science 79: 616-622.
7. th edition. Longman, Harlow, Essex, UK. 464 p.
8. Farnir, F., Grisart, B., Coppieters, W., Riquet, J., Berzi, P., Cambisano, N., Karim, L., Mni, M., Moisio, S., Simon, P., Wagenaar, D., Vilkki, J. & Georges, M. 2002. Simultaneous mining of linkage and linkage disequilibrium to fine-map QTL in outbred half-sib pedigrees: revisiting the location of a QTL with major effect on milk production on bovine chromosome 14. Genetics 161: 275-287.
9. Fernández, A., Rodrigáñez, J., Toro, M.A., Rodriguez, M.C. & Silió, L. 2002. Inbreeding effects on the parameters of the growth function in three strains of Iberian pigs. Journal of Animal Science 80: 2267-2275.
10. Fernando, R.L. & Grossman, M 1989. Marker assisted selection using best linear unbiased prediction. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 21: 467-477.
11. Gavora, J.S., Fairfull, R.W., Senkel, B.F., Cantwell, W.J. & Chambers, J.R. 1996. Prediction of heterosis from DNA fingerprints in chickens. Genetics 144: 777-784.
12. Gillois, M. 1964. Calcul de coefficients d'identité dáprés les liens de parenté. In: Communication aux Journées d'études de la Commission de Genetique de la Fédération européenne de Zootechnie, Lisbonn, 11 p.
13. Goring, H.H.H., Terwilliger, J.D. & Blangero, J. 2001. Large upward bias in estimation of locus-specific effects from genomewide scans. American Journal of Human Genetics 69: 1357-1369.
14. Harris, D.L. 1964. Genotypic covariances between inbred relatives. Genetics 50: 1319-1348.
15. Henderson, C.R. 1985. Best linear unbiased prediction of nonadditive genetic merits in noninbred populations. Journal of Animal Science 60: 111-117.
16. Hill, W.G. 1971. Theoretical aspects of crossbreeding. Annales Génétique et de Sélection Animale 3: 23-34.
17. Hill, W.G. 1977. Variation in response to selection, p. 343-365. In: Pollak, E., Kempthorne, O., Bailey, T.B. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Quantitative Genetics. 872 p.
18. Hoeschele I. & VanRaden P.M. 1991. Rapid inversion of dominance relationship matrices for noninbred populations by including sire-dam subclass effects. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 557-569.
19. Honkatukia, M., Reese, K., Preisinger, R., Tuiskula-Haavisto, M., Weigend, S., Roito, J., Mäki-Tanila, A. & Vilkki, J. 2005. Fishy taint in chicken eggs is associated with a substitution within a conserved motif of the FMO3 gene. Genomics 86: 225-232.
20. International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium 2004. Sequence and comparative analysis of the chicken genome provide unique perspectives on vertebrate evolution. Nature 432: 695-716.
21. Kantanen, J., Olsaker, I., Holm, L.-E., Lien, S., Vilkki, J., Brusgaard, K., Eythorsdottir, E., Danell, B. & Adalsteinsson, S. 2000. Genetic diversity and population structure of 20 North European cattle breeds. The Journal of Heredity 91: 446-457.
22. Lagervall, P.M. 1961. Quantitative inheritance and dominance. II. The genic and the dominace variance under inbreeding. Hereditas 47: 111-130.
23. Lerner, I.M. 1954. Genetic homeostasis. Oliver and Boyd. Edinburgh. 134 p.
24. Leymaster, K.A. & Swiger, L.A. 1981. Selection for increased leanness of Yorkshire swine. III. Inbreeding effects on secondary traits. Journal of Animal Science 53: 620-628.
25. Lo, L.L., Fernando, R. L., Cantet, R. J. C. & Grossman, M. 1995. Theory for modelling means and covariances in a two-breed population with dominance inheritance. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 90: 49-62.
26. Mäki-Tanila, A. 1982. The validity of the heritability concept. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh. 120 p.
27. Meadows, J.R.S., Hawken, R.J. & Kijas, J.W. 2004. Nucleotide diversity on the ovine Y chromosome. Animal Genetics 35: 379-385.
28. Meuwissen, T.H.E. 1997. Maximising the response of selection with predefined rate of inbreeding. Journal of Animal Science 75: 934-940.
29. Meuwissen, T.H.E., Hayes, B.J. & Goddard, M. E. 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157:1819-1829.
30. Misztal, I. 1997. Estimation of variance components with large-scale dominance models. Journal of Dairy Science 80: 965-974.
31. Palucci, V., Schaeffer, L.R., Miglior, F. & Osborne, V. 2007. Non-additive genetic effects for fertility traits in Canadian Holstein cattle. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 39: 181-93.
32. Perez-Enciso, M., Fernando, R.L., Bidanel, J-P. & Le Roy, P. 2001. Quantitative trait locus analysis in crosses between outbred lines with dominance and inbreeding. Genetics 159: 413-422.
33. Pong-Wong, R. & Woolliams, J.A. 1998. Response to mass selection when an identified major gene is segregating, Genetics, Selection, Evolution 30: 313-337.
34. Robertson, A. 1961. Inbreeding in articial selection programmes. Genetical Research 2: 189-194.
35. Robertson, A. 1964. The effect of non-random mating within lines on rate of inbreeding. Genetical Research 5: 164-167.
36. Robertson, A & Hill, W.G. 1983. Population and quantitative genetics of many linked loci in finite populations. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, Series B 219: 253-264.
37. Rosenberg, N., Burke, T., Elo, K., Feldman, M., Freidlin, P., Groenen, M., Hillel, J., Mäki-Tanila, A., Tixier-Boichard, M., Vignal, A., Wimmers, K. & Weigend, S. 2001. Empirical evaluation of genetic clustering methods using multilocus genotypes from twenty chicken breeds. Genetics 159: 699-713.
38. Schaeffer, L.R. 2006. Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 123: 218-223.
39. Schulman, N., Viitala, S., De Koning, D.-J., Virta, J., Mäki-Tanila, A. & Vilkki, J. 2004. Quantitative trait loci for health traits in Finnish Ayrshire cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87: 443-449.
40. Serenius, T., Stalder K.J. & Puonti, M. 2006. Impact of dominance effects on sow longevity. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 123: 355-61.
41. Sillanpää, M.J. & Arjas, E. 1998. Bayesian mapping of multiple quantitative trait loci from incomplete inbred line cross data. Genetics 148: 1373-1388.
42. Smith S.P. & Mäki-Tanila, A. 1990. Genotypic covariance matrices and their inverses for models allowing dominance and inbreeding. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 122: 65-91.
43. Tapio, M., Tapio, I., Grislis, Z., Holm, L.-E., Jeppsson, S., Kantanen, J., Miceikiene, I., Olsaker, I., Viinalass, H. & Eythorsdottir, E. 2005. Native breeds demonstrate high contributions to the molecular variation in Northern European sheep. Molecular Ecology 14: 3951-3963.
44. Templeton, A.R. & Read, B. 1984. Factors eliminating inbreeding depression in a captive herd of Speke's gazelle. Zoo Biology 3: 177-199.
45. Thompson, J.R., Everett, R.W. & Hammerschmidt, N.L. 2000a. Effects of inbreeding on reproduction and survival in Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 83: 1856-1864.
46. Thompson, J.R., Everett, R.W. & Wolfe, C.W. 2000b. Effects of inbreeding on reproduction and survival in Jerseys. Journal of Dairy Science 82: 2131-2138.
47. Toro, M.A. & Mäki-Tanila, A. 2007. Genomics reveals domestication history and facilitates breed development, p. 75-102. In: Oldenbroek, K. (ed.) Utilisation and conservation of farm animal genetic resources. Wageningen Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. 232 p.
48. Tuiskula-Haavisto, M., Dekoning, D.-J., Honkatukia, M., Schulman, N., Mäki-Tanila, A. & Vilkki, J. 2004. Quantitative trait loci with parent-of-origin effects in chicken. Genetical Research 84: 57-66.
49. Tuiskula-Haavisto, M., Honkatukia, M., Vilkki, J., De Koning, D.-J., Schulman, N. & Mäki-Tanila, A. 2002. Mapping of quantitative trait loci affecting quality and production traits in egg layers. Poultry Science 81: 919-927.
50. Uimari, P. & Kennedy, B.W. 1990. Mixed model methodology to estimate additive and dominance genetic values under complete dominance and inbreeding. Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production XIII: 297-300.
51. Vanhala, T., Tuiskula-Haavisto, M., Elo, K., Vilkki, J., Mäki-Tanila, A. 1998. Evaluation of genetic variability and genetic distances between eight chicken lines using microsatellite markers. Poultry Science 77: 783-790.
52. Varona, L. and Misztal, I. 1999. Prediction of parental dominance combinations for planned matings, methodology and simulation results. Journal of Dairy Science 82: 2186-2191.
53. Viitala, S., Schulman, N., De Koning, D.-J., Elo, K., Kinos, R., Virta, A., Virta, J., Mäki-Tanila, A. & Vilkki, J. 2003. Quantitative trait loci affecting milk production traits in Finnish Ayrshire dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 86: 1828-1836.
54. Viitala, S., Szyda, J., Blott, S., Schulman, N., Lidauer, M., Mäki-Tanila, A., Georges, M. & Vilkki, J. 2006. The role of the bovine growth hormone receptor and prolactin receptor genes in milk, fat and protein production in Finnish Ayrshire dairy cattle. Genetics 173: 2151-2164.
55. Virta, J., Markola, J., Peippo, J., Markkula, M. & Vilkki, J. 2002. Sex determination of bovine embryo blastomeres by fluorogenic probes. Theriogenology 57: 2229-2236.
56. Wall, E., Brotherstone, S., Kearney, J.F., Woolliams, J.A. & Coffey, M.P. 2005. Impact of non-additive genetic effects in the estimation of breeding values for fertility and correlated traits. Journal of Dairy Science 88: 376-385.
57. Wei, M., & van der Werf, J.H.J. 1994. Maximizing genetic response in crossbreds using both purebred and crossbred information. Animal Production 59: 401-413.
58. Wilkie, A.O.M. 1994. The molecular basis of genetic dominance. Journal of Medical Genetics 31: 89-98.
59. Woolliams, J.A., Bijma, P. & Villanueva, B. 1999. Expected genetic contributions and their impact on gene flow and genetic gain. Genetics 153: 1009-1020.
60. Wray N.R. & Thompson R. 1990. Prediction of rates of inbreeding in selected populations. Genetical Research 72: 41-54.
61. Xu, S. 2003. Estimating polygenic effects using markers of the entire genome. Genetics 163: 789-801.