Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28934948›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2017

Multi-breed genomic prediction using Bayes R with sequence data and dropping variants with a small effect.

Irene van den Berg, Phil J Bowman, Iona M MacLeod, Ben J Hayes, Tingting Wang, Sunduimijid Bolormaa, Mike E Goddard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Incorporating Omics Data in Genomic Prediction.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  15. Imputation accuracy to whole-genome sequence in Nellore cattle.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Irene van den BergFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Science, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. irene.vandenberg@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-9292-8636
Phil J BowmanAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, 3083, Australia.
Iona M MacLeodAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, 3083, Australia.
Ben J HayesAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, 3083, Australia.
Tingting WangAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, 3083, Australia.
Sunduimijid BolormaaAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, 3083, Australia.
Mike E GoddardFaculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Science, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing availability of whole-genome sequence data is expected to increase the accuracy of genomic prediction. However, results from simulation studies and analysis of real data do not always show an increase in accuracy from sequence data compared to high-density (HD) single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chip genotypes. In addition, the sheer number of variants makes analysis of all variants and accurate estimation of all effects computationally challenging. Our objective was to find a strategy to approximate the analysis of whole-sequence data with a Bayesian variable selection model. Using a simulated dataset, we applied a Bayes R hybrid model to analyse whole-sequence data, test the effect of dropping a proportion of variants during the analysis, and test how the analysis can be split into separate analyses per chromosome to reduce the elapsed computing time. We also investigated the effect of imputation errors on prediction accuracy. Subsequently, we applied the approach to a dataset that contained imputed sequences and records for production and fertility traits for 38,492 Holstein, Jersey, Australian Red and crossbred bulls and cows.

resultsWith the simulated dataset, we found that prediction accuracy was highly increased for a breed that was not represented in the training population for sequence data compared to HD SNP data. Either dropping part of the variants during the analysis or splitting the analysis into separate analyses per chromosome decreased accuracy compared to analysing whole-sequence data. First, dropping variants from each chromosome and reanalysing the retained variants together resulted in an accuracy similar to that obtained when analysing whole-sequence data. Adding imputation errors decreased prediction accuracy, especially for errors in the validation population. With real data, using sequence variants resulted in accuracies that were similar to those obtained with the HD SNPs.

conclusionsWe present an efficient approach to approximate analysis of whole-sequence data with a Bayesian variable selection model. The lack of increase in prediction accuracy when applied to real data could be due to imputation errors, which demonstrates the importance of developing more accurate methods of imputation or directly genotyping sequence variants that have a major effect in the prediction equation.

Indexed as

BreedingModels, GeneticAnimalsAustraliaBayes TheoremCattleDatabases, GeneticFemaleGenomicsGenotypeMalePolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID28934948
PMCPMC5609075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.