Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multibreed beef cattle populations derived from deregressed breeding values and phenotypes

Journal of Animal Science

Volumn 90, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 4177-4190

  Weber, K L ^a   Thallman, R M ^b   Keele, J W ^b   Snelling, W M ^b   Bennett, G L ^b   Smith, T P L ^b   McDaneld, T G ^b   Allan, M F ^b   Van Eenennaam, A L ^a   Kuehn, L A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b U S MEAT ANIMAL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BREEDING; CATTLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; GENOMICS; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; CATTLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENOMICS; MODELS, GENETIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SELECTION, GENETIC;

EID: 84882711405     PISSN: 00218812     EISSN: 15253163     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2527/jas.2011-4586     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. American Hereford Association. 2010. Spring 2010 American Hereford Association sire summary. Accessed June 20, 2010. http://www.hereford.org/static/files/ss_S10_Preface.pdf.
2. American International Charolais Association. 2011. 2011 Charolais national cattle evaluation. Accessed Jan. 23, 2011. http://www.charolaisusa.com/pdf/2010/dec30/TableHeritabilityandGeneticCorrelations.pdf.
3. American Shorthorn Association. 2009. 2009 Shorthorn sire summary. Accessed June 10, 2010. http://www.shorthorn.org/images/performance/siresummary/2009SireSummary_online.pdf.
4. Beef Improvement Federation. 2010. Guidelines for Uniform Beef Improvement Programs. 9th ed. Beef Improvement Federation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
5. De Roos, A., B. Hayes, R. Spelman, and M. Goddard. 2008. Linkage disequilibrium and persistence of phase in Holstein-Friesian, Jersey and Angus cattle. Genetics 179:1503.
6. Dekkers, J. 2007. Marker-assisted selection for commercial crossbred performance. J. Anim. Sci. 85:2104-2114.
7. Fernando, R., and D. Garrick. 2009. GenSel - User manual for a portfolio of genomic selection related analyses, 2nd ed. for version 2.12. Animal Breeding and Genetics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
8. Garrick, D., J. Taylor, and R. Fernando. 2009. Deregressing estimated breeding values and weighting information for genomic regression analyses. Genet. Sel. Evol. 41:55.
9. Geweke, J. 1992. Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to the calculation of posterior moments (Disc: P 189-193). Bayesian Stat. 4:169-188.
10. Gilmour, A. R., B. J. Gogel, B. R. Cullis, and R. Thompson. 2009. ASReml User Guide Release 3.0. VSN International Ltd., Hemel Hempstead, UK.
11. Goddard, M. 2009. Genomic selection: Prediction of accuracy and maximisation of long term response. Genetica 136:245-257.
12. Habier, D., R. Fernando, and J. Dekkers. 2007. The impact of genetic relationship information on genome-assisted breeding values. Genetics 177:2389.
13. Habier, D., R. L. Fernando, K. Kizilkaya, and D. J. Garrick. 2011. Extension of the Bayesian alphabet for genomic selection. BMC Bioinf. 12:186.
14. Habier, D., J. Tetens, F. Seefried, P. Lichtner, and G. Thaller. 2010. The impact of genetic relationship information on genomic breeding values in German Holstein cattle. Genet. Sel. Evol. 42:5.
15. Hayes, B., P. Bowman, A. Chamberlain, and M. Goddard. 2009a. Genomic selection in dairy cattle: Progress and challenges. J. Dairy Sci. 92:433-443.
16. Hayes, B. J., P. J. Bowman, A. C. Chamberlain, K. Verbyla, and M. E. Goddard. 2009b. Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations. Genet. Sel. Evol. 41:51.
17. Hayes, B., P. Bowman, J. Pryce, A. Chamberlain, K. Guthridge, and M. Goddard. 2011. Genomic predictions within and across cattle breeds with very high density SNP markers. Abstract W136 in Proc. Plant & Anim. Genome XIX Conf., San Diego, CA.
18. Heidelberger, P., and P. D. Welch. 1983. Simulation run length control in the presence of an initial transient. Operations Res. 31:1109-1144.
19. Janss, L., and M. M. Shariati. 2010. Genomic estimation of heritability under different gene action scenarios. In Proc. 9th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production (WCGALP), Leipzig, Germany.
20. Johnston, D., M. G. Jeyaruban, and H.-U. Graser. 2010. Evaluation of Pfi zer animal genetics HD 50K MVP calibration. Accessed May 9, 2011. http://agbu.une.edu.au/pdf/Pfizer_50K_September%202010.pdf.
21. Kachman, S. 2008. Incorporation of marker scores into national genetic evaluation. Pages 92-98 in Proc. 9th Genet. Pred. Wksp., Beef Improvement Federation, Kansas City, MO.
22. Kizilkaya, K., R. Fernando, and D. Garrick. 2010. Genomic prediction of simulated multibreed and purebred performance using observed fi fty thousand single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes. J. Anim. Sci. 88:544.
23. Koots, K., J. Gibson, C. Smith, and J. Wilton. 1994. Analyses of published genetic parameter estimates for beef production traits 1. Heritability. Anim. Breed. 62:309
24. Kuehn, L., L. Van Vleck, R. Thallman, and L. Cundiff. 2010. Acrossbreed EPD tables for the year 2010 adjusted to breed differences for birth year of 2008. Pages 71-92 in Proc. 2010 Beef Improvement Federation Res. Symp. & Annu. Meet., Columbia, MO.
25. MacNeil, M., and S. Northcutt. 2008. National cattle evaluation system for combined analysis of carcass characteristics and indicator traits recorded by using ultrasound in Angus cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 86:2518.
26. MacNeil, M., S. Northcutt, R. Schnabel, D. Garrick, B. Woodward, and J. Taylor. 2010. Genetic correlations between carcass traits and molecular breeding values in Angus cattle. Proc. 9th World Congr. Genet. Appl. Livest. Prod., Leipzig, Germany.
27. Meuwissen, T., B. Hayes, and M. Goddard. 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157:1819.
28. Moser, D., J. Bertrand, I. Misztal, L. Kriese, and L. Benyshek. 1998. Genetic parameter estimates for carcass and yearling ultrasound measurements in Brangus cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 76:2542.
29. North American Limousin Federation. 2000. North American Limousin Foundation member's manual. Accessed June 10, 2010. http://www.nalf.org/pdf/2010/aug23/2000manuald.pdf.
30. Northcutt, S. 2011. Genomic choices. Accessed May 9, 2011. http://angus.org/AGI/GenomicChoiceApril2011.pdf.
31. Pfi zer Animal Genetics. 2010. Technical summary: High density (HD) 50K MVPs. Accessed June 12, 2010. https://animalhealth.pfizer.com/sites/pahweb/US/EN/PublishingImages/Genetics%20Assets/HD50K/50K%20Tech%20Summary%204-13-10.pdf.
32. Phocas, F., and D. Laloë. 2004. Genetic parameters for birth and weaning traits in French specialized beef cattle breeds. Livest. Prod. Sci. 89:121-128.
33. Plummer, M., N. Best, K. Cowles, and K. Vines. 2006. CODA: Convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R News 6:7-11.
34. Pryce, J., B. Gredler, S. Bolormaa, P. Bowman, C. Egger-Danner, C. Fuerst, R. Emmerling, J. Sölkner, M. Goddard, and B. Hayes. 2011. Genetic selection using a multi-breed, across-country reference population. J. Dairy Sci. 94:2625-2630.
35. Riley, D., C. Chase Jr., A. Hammond, R. West, D. Johnson, T. Olson, and S. Coleman. 2002. Estimated genetic parameters for carcass traits of Brahman cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 80:955.
36. Thallman, R. 2004. DNA testing and marker assisted selection Accessed Jan. 20, 2011. http://www.beefimprovement.org/proceedings/04proceedings/thallman.pdf.
37. Toosi, A., R. Fernando, and J. Dekkers. 2010. Genomic selection in admixed and crossbred populations. J. Anim. Sci. 88:32.
38. VanRaden, P., C. Van Tassell, G. Wiggans, T. Sonstegard, R. Schnabel, J. Taylor, and F. Schenkel. 2009. Invited review: Reliability of genomic predictions for North American Holstein bulls. J. Dairy Sci. 92:16.
39. Wiggans, G., and P. VanRaden. 1991. Method and effect of adjustment for heterogeneous variance. J. Dairy Sci. 74:4350-4357.
40. Wolc, A., C. Stricker, J. Arango, P. Settar, J. E. Fulton, N. P. O'Sullivan, R. Preisinger, D. Habier, R. Fernando, D. J. Garrick, S. J. Lamont, and J. C. M. Dekkers. 2011. Breeding value prediction for production traits in layer chickens using pedigree or genomic relationships in a reduced animal model. Genet. Sel. Evol. 43:5.