Efficiency of multi-trait, indirect, and trait-assisted genomic selection for improvement of biomass sorghum

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

Volumn 131, Issue 3, 2018, Pages 747-755

  Fernandes, Samuel B ^a   Dias, Kaio O G ^b   Ferreira, Daniel F ^c   Brown, Patrick J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^c FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF LAVRAS   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGY; FORECASTING; GENES; MOISTURE; POPULATION STATISTICS;

BIOMASS YIELD; BREEDING POPULATIONS; EFFICIENT STRATEGY; GROWTH PROGRESS; KEY MESSAGE; PLANT HEIGHT; PREDICTION ACCURACY; SELECTION METHODS;

BIOMASS;

BIOMASS; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; GENOMICS; GENOTYPE; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; PHENOTYPE; PLANT BREEDING; SORGHUM;

BIOMASS; GENOMICS; GENOTYPE; PHENOTYPE; PLANT BREEDING; SELECTION, GENETIC; SORGHUM;

EID: 85037341095     PISSN: 00405752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00122-017-3033-y     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Araus JL, Cairns JE (2014) Field high-throughput phenotyping: the new crop breeding frontier. Trends Plant Sci 19(1):52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2013.09.008
2. Browning BL, Browning SR (2011) A fast, powerful method for detecting identity by descent. Am J Hum Genet 88(2):173–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.01.010
3. Burgueño J, de los Campos G, Weigel K, Crossa J (2012) Genomic prediction of breeding values when modeling genotype + environment interaction using pedigree and dense molecular markers. Crop Sci 52(2):707–719. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2011.06.0299
4. Burks PS, Kaiser CM, Hawkins FM, Brown PJ (2015) Genomewide association for sugar yield in sweet sorghum. Crop Sci 55(5):2138–2148
5. Butler DG, Cullis BR, Gilmour AR, Gogel BJ (2009) ASReml-r reference manual. Technical report Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries
6. Calus MPL, Veerkamp RF (2011) Accuracy of multi-trait genomic selection using different methods. Genet Sel Evol. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-43-26
7. Castro FMR, Bruzi AT, Nunes JAR, Parrella RAC, Lombardi GMR, Albuquerque CJB, Lopes M (2015) Agronomic and energetic potential of biomass sorghum genotypes. Am J Plant Sci 6:1862–1873. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2015.611187
8. Combs E, Bernardo R (2013) Accuracy of genomewide selection for different traits with constant population size, heritability, and number of markers. Plant Genome 6(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.3835/plantgenome2012.11.0030
9. de los Campos G, Hickey JM, Pong-Wong R, Daetwyler HD, Calus MPL (2013) Whole-genome regression and prediction methods applied to plant and animal breeding. Genetics 193(2):327–345. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.112.143313
10. de los Campos G, Sorensen D, Gianola D (2015) Genomic heritability: what is it? Genetics 11(5):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1005048
11. dos Santos JPR, Vasconcellos RCC, Pires LPM, Balestre M, Von Pinho RG (2016) Inclusion of dominance effects in the multivariate gblup model. PLoS One 11(4):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152045
12. Endelman JB, Jannink JL (2012) Shrinkage estimation of the realized relationship matrix. G3 2(11):1405–1413. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.112.004259
13. Ferreira DF (2011) Estatística Multivariada, 2nd edn. UFLA, Lavras, MG, Brazil
14. Isik F, Maltecca C, Holland J (2017) Genetic data analysis for plant and animal breeding, vol 1. Springer International Publishing, New York
15. Galesloot TE, Van Steen K, Kiemeney LALM, Janss LL, Vermeulen SH (2014) A comparison of multivariate genome-wide association methods. PLoS One 9(4):1–8
16. Gawenda I, Thorwarth P, Günther T, Ordon F, Schmid KJ (2015) Genome-wide association studies in elite varieties of German winter barley using single-marker and haplotype-based methods. Plant Breed 134(1):2839. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12237
17. Gilmour AR, Cullis BR, Verbyla AP (1997) Accounting for natural and extraneuous variation in the analysis of field experiments. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 2(3):269–273
18. Glaubitz JC, Casstevens TM, Lu F, Harriman J, Elshire RJ, Sun Q, Buckler ES (2014) Tassel-gbs: a high capacity genotyping by sequencing analysis pipeline. PLoS One 9(2):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090346
19. Guo G, Zhao F, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Du L, Su G (2014) Comparison of single-trait and multiple-trait genomic prediction models. BMC Genet 15:30. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-15-30
20. Hamblin J, Zimmermann MJO (1986) Breeding common bean for yield in mixtures. Plant Breed Rev 4:245–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118061015.ch8
21. Hayes BJ, Bowman PJ, Chamberlain AJ, Goddard ME (2009a) Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. J Dairy Sci 92(2):433–443. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1646
22. Hayes BJ, Visscher PM (2009b) Increased accuracy of artificial selection by using the realized relationship matrix. Genet Res 91(1):47–60. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672308009981
23. Heffner EL, Lorenz AJ, Jannink JL, Sorrells ME (2010) Plant breeding with genomic selection: gain per unit time and cost. Crop Sci 50(5):1681. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2009.11.0662
24. Heffner EL, Jannink JL, Sorrells ME (2011) Genomic selection accuracy using multifamily prediction models in a wheat breeding program. Plant Genome 4(1):65–75. https://doi.org/10.3835/plantgenome2010.12.0029
25. Henderson CR (1975) Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31(2):423–447
26. Heslot N, Yang HP, Sorrells ME, Jannink JL (2012) Genomic selection in plant breeding: a comparison of models. Crop Sci 52(1):146–160. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2011.06.0297
27. Heslot N, Jannink JL, Sorrells ME (2015) Perspectives for genomic selection applications and research in plants. Crop Sci 55(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2014.03.0249
28. Jia Y, Jannink JL (2012) Multiple-trait genomic selection methods increase genetic value prediction accuracy. Genetics 192(4):1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.112.144246
29. Kadarmideen HN, Thompson R, Coffey MP, Kossaibati MA (2003) Genetic parameters and evaluations from single- and multiple-trait analysis of dairy cow fertility and milk production. Livest Prod Sci 81(2—-3):183–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00274-9
30. Langmead B, Salzberg SL (2012) Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods 9(4):357–360. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1923
31. Lehermeier C, Kramer N, Bauer E, Bauland C, Camisan C, Campo L, Flament P, Melchinger AE, Menz M, Meyer N, Moreau L, Moreno-Gonzalez J, Ouzunova M, Pausch H, Ranc N, Schipprack W, Schonleben M, Walter H, Charcosset A, Schon CC (2014) Usefulness of multiparental populations of maize (Zea mays L.) for genome-based prediction. Genetics 198(1):3–16. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.114.161943
32. Lipka AE, Lu F, Cherney JH, Buckler ES, Casler MD, Costich DE (2014) Accelerating the switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) breeding cycle using genomic selection approaches. PloS one 9(11):e112,227. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112227
33. Monk RL, Miller FR, McBee GG (1984) Sorghum improvement for energy production. Biomass 6(1—-2):145–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-4565(84)90017-9
34. Mrode RA (2014) Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values, 3rd edn. CABI, Oxfordshire, UK
35. R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 4 July 2016
36. Riedelsheimer C, Endelman JB, Stange M, Sorrells ME, Jannink JL, Melchinger AE (2013) Genomic predictability of interconnected biparental maize populations. Genetics 194(2):493–503. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.113.150227
37. Schaeffer LR (1984) Sire and cow evaluation under multiple trait models. J Dairy Sci 67(7):1567–1580. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(84)81479-4
38. Schulthess AW, Wang Y, Miedaner T, Wilde P, Reif JC (2016) Multiple-trait- and selection indices-genomic predictions for grain yield and protein content in rye for feeding purposes. Theor Appl Genet 129(2):273–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-015-2626-6
39. Shiringani AL, Friedt W (2011) QTL for fibre-related traits in grain sweet sorghum as a tool for the enhancement of sorghum as a biomass crop. Theor Appl Genet 123(6):999–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-011-1642-4
40. Sonesson AK, Meuwissen THE (2009) Testing strategies for genomic selection in aquaculture breeding programs. Genet Sel Evol 41(37):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-41-37
41. Vallée A, van Arendonk JAM, Bovenhuis H (2014) Accuracy of genomic prediction when combining two related crossbred populations. J Anim Sci 92(10):4342–4348. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8109
42. VanRaden (2008) Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. Am Dairy Sci Assoc 91:4414–4423. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0980
43. Vermerris W, Saballos A (2013) Genetic enhancement of sorghum for biomass utilization. In: Paterson HA (ed) Genomics of the Saccharinae. Springer, New York, pp 391–425
44. Yu X, Li X, Guo T, Zhu C, Wu Y, Mitchell SE, Roozeboom KL, Wang D, Wang ML, Pederson GA, Tesso TT, Schnable PS, Bernardo R, Yu J (2016) Global strategy to turbocharge gene banks. Nat Plants 2(10):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2016.150