A low-marker density implementation of genomic selection in aquaculture using within-family genomic breeding values

Genetics Selection Evolution

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Lillehammer, Marie ^a   Meuwissen, Theo H E ^b   Sonesson, Anna K ^a  

^a NOFIMA   (Norway)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AQUACULTURE; BREEDING SEASON; GENETIC STRUCTURE; GENOMICS; INBREEDING; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; SELECTION;

ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; AQUACULTURE; ARTICLE; FEMALE; GENETIC MARKER; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; GENOME; GENOTYPE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PHENOTYPE; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS; SALMON;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; AQUACULTURE; FEMALE; GENETIC MARKERS; GENOME; GENOTYPE; MALE; PHENOTYPE; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCI; SALMON; SELECTION, GENETIC;

EID: 84885364111     PISSN: 0999193X     EISSN: 12979686     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-45-39     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME, Genetics 2001 157 1819 1829 11290733 (Pubitemid 32298846)
2. Prediction of response to marker-assisted and genomic selection using selection index theory. Dekkers JCM, J Anim Breed Genet 2007 124 331 341 10.1111/j.1439-0388.2007.00701.x 18076470 (Pubitemid 350231125)
3. Comparison of accuracy of genome-wide and BLUP breeding value estimates in sib based aquaculture breeding schemes. Nielsen HM, Sonesson AK, Yazdi H, Meuwissen THE, Aquaculture 2009 289 259 264 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009.01.027
4. Review. Promises, pitfalls and challenges of genomic selection in breeding programs. Ibañez-Escriche N, Gonzalez-Recio O, Span J Agric Res 2011 9 404 413
5. Genomic selection using different marker types and densities. Solberg TR, Sonesson AK, Woolliams JA, Meuwissen THE, J Anim Sci 2008 86 2447 2454 10.2527/jas.2007-0010 18407980
6. The use of communal rearing of families and DNA pooling in aquaculture genomic selection schemes. Sonesson AK, Meuwissen THE, Goddard ME, Genet Sel Evol 2010 42 41 21092198
7. Evaluation of an Atlantic salmon SNP chip as a genomic tool for the application in a Tasmanian Atlantic salmon breeding population. Dominik S, Henshall JM, Kube PD, King H, Lien S, Kent MP, Elliot NG, Aquaculture 2010 308 56 S61
8. Genomic selection using low-density marker panels. Habier D, Fernando RL, Dekkers JCM, Genetics 2009 182 343 353 10.1534/genetics.108.100289 19299339
9. Within-family marker-assisted selection for aquaculture species. Sonesson AK, Genet Sel Evol 2007 39 301 317 10.1186/1297-9686-39-3-301 17433243 (Pubitemid 47124202)
10. Testing strategies for genomic selection in aquaculture breeding programs. Sonesson AK, Meuwissen THE, Genet Sel Evol 2009 41 37 10.1186/1297-9686-41-37 19566932
11. Effect of family-structure in small populations on selection differentials and correlation of relatives performance for quantitative traits. Hill WG, Adv Appl Probab 1976 8 636 638 10.2307/1425922
12. Most of the benefits from genomic selection can be realised by genotyping a proportion of selection candidates. Henryon M, Berg P, Sørensen AC, Ostersen T, Nielsen B, Proceedings of the 62nd annual meeting of the European federation of animal science: 29 August-2 September 2011; Stavanger The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers 2011 391
13. The importance of identity-by-state information for the accuracy of genomic selection. Luan T, Woolliams JA, Ødegård J, Dolezal M, Roman-Ponce SI, Bagnato A, Meuwissen THE, Genet Sel Evol 2012 44 28 10.1186/1297-9686-44-28 22937985