Efficiency of genomic selection in an established commercial layer breeding program

Genetics Selection Evolution

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Sitzenstock, Florian ^a   Ytournel, Florence ^a   Sharifi, Ahmad R ^a   Cavero, David ^b   Täubert, Helge ^c   Preisinger, Rudolf ^b   Simianer, Henner ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

^b LOHMANN TIERZUCHT GMBH   (Germany)

^c Vereinigte Informationssysteme Tierhaltung wV VIT   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREEDING; COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; GENOMICS; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; POULTRY; PROFITABILITY; SOFTWARE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ANIMALIA;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BREEDING; CHICKEN; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; GENETICS; GENOME; GENOMICS; HYBRIDIZATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; CHICKENS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GENOME; GENOMICS; HYBRIDIZATION, GENETIC; MALE; MODELS, GENETIC; POLYMORPHISM, SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT, HERITABLE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84880860836     PISSN: 0999193X     EISSN: 12979686     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-45-29     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Economic and market issues on the sustainability of egg production in the United States: analysis of alternative production systems. Sumner DA, Gow H, Hayes D, Matthews W, Norwood B, Rosen-Molina JT, Thurman W, Poult Sci 2011 90 241 250 10.3382/ps.2010-00822 21177466
2. Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle. Schaeffer LR, J Anim Breed Genet 2006 123 218 223 10.1111/j.1439-0388.2006.00595.x 16882088 (Pubitemid 44049951)
3. Economic evaluation of genomic breeding programs. König S, Simianer H, Willam A, J Dairy Sci 2009 92 382 391 10.3168/jds.2008-1310 19109296
4. Interbull survey on the use of genomic information. Loberg A, Dürr JW, Interbull Bull 2009 39 3 14
5. Implementation of genomic selection in egg layer chickens. Dekkers JCM, Stricker C, Fernando RL, Garrick DJ, Lamont SJ, ÓSullivan NP, Fulton JE, Arango J, Settar P, Kranis A, McKay J, Watson KA, Koerhuis A, Preisinger R, J Anim Sci 2010 87 E Suppl 2 6 http://www.jtmtg.org/2009/abstracts/Late-Breaking. pdf
6. Genomic selection in layer chickens outperforms pedigree-based selection. Wolc A, Arango J, Settar P, Fulton JE, O'Sullivan NP, Preisinger R, Habier D, Fernando RL, Garrick DJ, Lamont SJ, Dekkers JCM, J Anim Sci 2013 91 Suppl 2 23
7. A genetic variation map for chicken with 2.8 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Wong GK, Liu B, Wang J, Zhang Y, Yang X, Zhang Z, Meng Q, Zhou J, Li D, Zhang J, Ni P, Li S, Ran L, Li H, Zhang J, Li R, Li S, Zheng H, Lin W, Li G, Wang X, Zhao W, Li J, Ye C, Dai M, Ruan J, Zhou Y, Li Y, He X, Zhang Y, et al. Nature 2004 432 717 722 10.1038/nature03156 15592405 (Pubitemid 39656286)
8. Review of quantitative trait loci identified in the chickens. Abasht B, Dekkers JCM, Lamont SJ, Poult Sci 2006 85 2079 2096 17135661 (Pubitemid 46063978)
9. Fishy taint in chicken eggs is associated with a substitution within a conserved motif of the FMO3 gene. Honkatukia M, Reese K, Preisinger R, Tuiskula-Haavisto M, Weigend S, Roito J, Mäki-Tanila A, Vilkki J, Genomics 2005 86 225 232 10.1016/j.ygeno.2005.04.005 15916878 (Pubitemid 40917226)
10. Mareḱs disease viruses lacking either R-LORF10 or LORF4 have altered virulence in chickens. Kim T, Hunt HD, Cheng HH, Virus Genes 2010 40 410 420 10.1007/s11262-010-0469-4 20229182
11. The development and characterization of a 60K SNP chip for chicken. Groenen MAM, Megens HJ, Zare Y, Warren WC, Hillier LW, Crooijmans RPMA, Vereijken A, Okimoto R, Muir WM, Cheng HH, BMC Genomics 2011 12 274 10.1186/1471-2164-12-274 21627800
12. Täubert H, Reinhardt F, Simianer H, ZPLAN+-A new software to evaluate and optimize animal breeding programs Leipzig: In Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production 2010 [ http://www.kongressband.de/wcgalp2010/assets/pdf/0950.pdf ] 23902427
13. Prediction and evaluation of response to selection with overlapping generations. Hill WG, Anim Prod 1974 18 117 139 10.1017/S0003356100017372
14. The efficiency of three methods of selection. Hazel LN, Lush JL, J Hered 1942 33 393 399
15. Karras K, Niebel E, Graser H-U, Bartenschlager H, Nitter G, ZPLAN-A PC Computer Program to Optimize Livestock Selection Programs User's manual: University of Stuttgart, Hohenheim 1997
16. The effect of selection on genetic variability. Bulmer MG, Am Nat 1971 105 201 211 10.1086/282718
17. Prediction of response to marker-assisted and genomic selection using the selection index theory. Dekkers JCM, J Anim Breed Genet 2007 124 331 341 10.1111/j.1439-0388.2007.00701.x 18076470 (Pubitemid 350231125)
18. Einbindung genomischer Informationen in den Selektionsindex. Haberland A, Ytournel F, Simianer H, Proceeding of Vortragstagung der Gesellschaft für Züchtungskunde e.V. (DGfZ) und der Gesellschaft für Tierzuchtwissenschaften (GfT) Freising-Weihenstephan 2011
19. Empirical determination of the number of independent chromosome segments based on cross-validated data. Erbe M, Reinhardt F, Simianer H, Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science Stavanger 2011
20. Accuracy of predicting the genetic risk of diseases using genome-wide approach. Daetwyler HD, Villanueva B, Wooliams JA, PLoS ONE 2008 3 3395 10.1371/journal.pone.0003395 18852893
21. The impact of genetic architecture on genome wide evaluation methods. Daetwyler HD, Pong-Wong R, Villanueva B, Wooliams JA, Genetics 2010 185 1021 1031 10.1534/genetics.110.116855 20407128
22. Genomic selection: prediction of accuracy and maximisation of long term response. Goddard M, Genetica 2009 136 245 257 10.1007/s10709-008-9308-0 18704696
23. A high density SNP based linkage map of the chicken genome reveals sequence features correlated with recombination rate. Groenen MAM, Wahlberg P, Foglio M, Cheng HH, Megens HJ, Crooijmans R, Besnier F, Lathrop M, Muir WM, Wong GK, Gut I, Andersson L, Genome Res 2009 19 510 519 19088305
24. Evaluation of selection strategies including genomic breeding values in pigs. Haberland AM, Ytournel F, Luther H, Simianer H, Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science Heraklion 2010
25. Sitzenstock F, König S, Ytournel F, Simianer H, Evaluation of genomic selection for functional traits in horse breeding programs Leipzig: In Proceedings of the 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production 2010 [ http://www.kongressband.de/wcgalp2010/assets/pdf/0630.pdf ]
26. Genetic variability of egg production traits in purebred and crossbred laying hens. Besbes B, Gibson JP, Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production: 11-16 January 1998; Armidale, Volume 25 1998 459 462
27. Inbreeding and inbreeding depression on reproduction and production traits of White Leghorn lines selected for egg production traits. Sewalem A, Johansson KM, Wilhelmson M, Lillpers K, Br Poult Sci 1999 40 203 208 10.1080/00071669987601 10465386 (Pubitemid 129707499)
28. Most of the benefits from genomic selection can be realized by genotyping a small proportion of available selection candidates. Henryon M, Berg P, Ostersen T, Nielsen B, Sørensen AC, J Anim Sci 2012 90 4681 4689 10.2527/jas.2012-5158 23087087
29. Genomic selection using low-density marker panels. Habier D, Fernando RL, Dekkers JCM, Genetics 2009 182 343 353 10.1534/genetics.108.100289 19299339
30. Effect of imputing markers from a low-density chip on the reliability of genomic breeding values in Holstein populations. Dassonneville R, BrØndum RF, Druet T, Fritz S, Guillaume F, Guldbrandtsen B, Lund MS, Ducrocq V, Su G, J Dairy Sci 2011 94 3679 3686 10.3168/jds.2011-4299 21700057
31. Impact of genomic selection on functional traits in a dual purpose cattle breeding program. Ytournel F, Willam A, Simianer H, Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science Stavanger 2011
32. Breeding value prediction for production traits in layer chickens using pedigree or genomic relationships in a reduced animal model. Wolc A, Stricker C, Arango J, Settar P, Fulton JE, ÓSullivan NP, Preisinger R, Habier D, Fernando R, Garrick DJ, Lamont SJ, Dekkers JCM, Genet Sel Evol 2011 43 5 10.1186/1297-9686-43-5 21255418