Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29133511›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2018

Which Individuals To Choose To Update the Reference Population? Minimizing the Loss of Genetic Diversity in Animal Genomic Selection Programs.

Sonia E Eynard, Pascal Croiseau, Denis Laloë, Sebastien Fritz, Mario P L Calus, Gwendal Restoux

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Technological advances in maize breeding: past, present and future.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2019
    Review
  9. Optimal cross selection for long-term genetic gain in two-part programs with rapid recurrent genomic selection.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2018
    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

6 authors.

Sonia E EynardGénétique Animale et Biologie Intégrative (GABI), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France sonia.eynard@wur.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-8609-5869
Pascal CroiseauGénétique Animale et Biologie Intégrative (GABI), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France.
Denis LaloëGénétique Animale et Biologie Intégrative (GABI), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France.
Sebastien FritzGénétique Animale et Biologie Intégrative (GABI), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France.
Mario P L CalusAnimal Breeding and Genomics Centre, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3213-704X
Gwendal RestouxGénétique Animale et Biologie Intégrative (GABI), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic selection (GS) is commonly used in livestock and increasingly in plant breeding. Relying on phenotypes and genotypes of a reference population, GS allows performance prediction for young individuals having only genotypes. This is expected to achieve fast high genetic gain but with a potential loss of genetic diversity. Existing methods to conserve genetic diversity depend mostly on the choice of the breeding individuals. In this study, we propose a modification of the reference population composition to mitigate diversity loss. Since the high cost of phenotyping is the limiting factor for GS, our findings are of major economic interest. This study aims to answer the following questions: how would decisions on the reference population affect the breeding population, and how to best select individuals to update the reference population and balance maximizing genetic gain and minimizing loss of genetic diversity? We investigated three updating strategies for the reference population: random, truncation, and optimal contribution (OC) strategies. OC maximizes genetic merit for a fixed loss of genetic diversity. A French Montbéliarde dairy cattle population with 50K SNP chip genotypes and simulations over 10 generations were used to compare these different strategies using milk production as the trait of interest. Candidates were selected to update the reference population. Prediction bias and both genetic merit and diversity were measured. Changes in the reference population composition slightly affected the breeding population. Optimal contribution strategy appeared to be an acceptable compromise to maintain both genetic gain and diversity in the reference and the breeding populations.

Indexed as

GenomeModels, GeneticQuantitative Trait, HeritableSelection, GeneticAnimalsBreedingCattleDairyingFemaleGenetic VariationGenotypeLactationMalePhenotypegenetic diversitygenomic selectionGenPredoptimal contributionreference populationShared data resources

Identifiers

PMID29133511
PMCPMC5765340

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.