Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33028194›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2020

The impact of training on data from genetically-related lines on the accuracy of genomic predictions for feed efficiency traits in pigs.

Amir Aliakbari, Emilie Delpuech, Yann Labrune, Juliette Riquet, Hélène Gilbert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2020. 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. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Genetic relationships between feed efficiency and gut microbiome in pig lines selected for residual feed intake.Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie · 2021
    Article
  7. New residual feed intake criterion for longitudinal data.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors.

Amir AliakbariGenPhySE, Université de Toulouse, INRAE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France. amir.alikbari@inrae.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5213-054X
Emilie DelpuechGenPhySE, Université de Toulouse, INRAE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France.
Yann LabruneGenPhySE, Université de Toulouse, INRAE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France.
Juliette RiquetGenPhySE, Université de Toulouse, INRAE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France.
Hélène GilbertGenPhySE, Université de Toulouse, INRAE, 31326, Castanet-Tolosan, France.

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-16-CE20-0003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost genomic predictions use a unique population that is split into a training and a validation set. However, genomic prediction using genetically heterogeneous training sets could provide more flexibility when constructing the training sets in small populations. The aim of our study was to investigate the potential of genomic prediction of feed efficiency related traits using training sets that combine animals from two different, but genetically-related lines. We compared realized prediction accuracy and prediction bias for different training set compositions for five production traits.

resultsGenomic breeding values (GEBV) were predicted using the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction method in six scenarios applied iteratively to two genetically-related lines (i.e. 12 scenarios). The objective for all scenarios was to predict GEBV of pigs in the last three generations (~ 400 pigs, G7 to G9) of a given line. For each line, a control scenario was set up with a training set that included only animals from that line (target line). For all traits, adding more animals from the other line to the training set did not increase prediction accuracy compared to the control scenario. A small decrease in prediction accuracies was found for average daily gain, backfat thickness, and daily feed intake as the number of animals from the target line decreased in the training set. Including more animals from the other line did not decrease prediction accuracy for feed conversion ratio and residual feed intake, which were both highly affected by selection within lines. However, prediction biases were systematic for these cases and might be reduced with bivariate analyses.

conclusionsOur results show that genomic prediction using a training set that includes animals from genetically-related lines can be as accurate as genomic prediction using a training set from the target population. With combined reference sets, accuracy increased for traits that were highly affected by selection. Our results provide insights into the design of reference populations, especially to initiate genomic selection in small-sized lines, for which the number of historical samples is small and that are developed simultaneously. This applies especially to poultry and pig breeding and to other crossbreeding schemes.

Indexed as

Animal FeedWeight GainAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsBiasBreedingGenetic FitnessGenome-Wide Association StudySwine

Identifiers

PMID33028194
PMCPMC7539441

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.