Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42204488›Full record

ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2026

Restructuring breeding programs 2: Assortative mating for improved commercial genetic gain when using optimum contribution selection and diversity introduction.

Tobias A M Niehoff, Jan Ten Napel, Torsten Pook, Mario P L Calus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Tobias A M NiehoffAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, P.O. Box 338, Wageningen, 6700AH, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3046-6699
Jan Ten NapelAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, P.O. Box 338, Wageningen, 6700AH, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1918-9080
Torsten PookAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, P.O. Box 338, Wageningen, 6700AH, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7874-8500
Mario P L CalusAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, P.O. Box 338, Wageningen, 6700AH, The Netherlands. mario.calus@wur.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3213-704X

Funding

Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs Breed4Food (TKI Agri & Food Project LWV20054)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommercial breeding programs have two goals: genetic gain in the breeding population and delivering competitive genetic products, like semen, to production farms. Breeding programs must also manage genetic diversity, which reduces short-term genetic gain. Our study aimed to investigate the use of assortative mating to increase the genetic variance of the next generation. The resulting higher genetic variance is expected to increase the genetic level of the best animals of which semen can be sold to producers. We are here particularly interested in applying this strategy in breeding programs that invest in diversity introduction by bringing lost or lowly related alleles from lower-performing sources into the elite nucleus breeding population. We test two assortative mating strategies. The first, 'maximum assortative mating', aimed to increase the genetic variance as much as possible by mating the best male with the best female, second best with second best and so on. The second, 'tuned assortative mating', aimed to increase the genetic variance as much as needed to make the same gain as a hypothetical competitor that uses random mating. The motivation for the tuned strategy was to limit anticipated negative effects of assortative mating on genomic prediction accuracies.

resultsThe 'tuned' strategy was outperformed by the 'maximum' strategy, and no negative effects on prediction accuracy or biases due to the mating strategy were found. With truncation selection, i.e., no control of the inbreeding rate, assortative mating led to a faster decrease of genetic diversity over time compared to random mating. Assortative mating combined with optimum contribution selection (OCS) showed a comparable inbreeding rate to random mating, and led to higher variance of breeding values. While achieving the same genetic gain of the population average, OCS with assortative mating thus led to a higher genetic level of the elite boars from which semen was marketed.

conclusionsAssortative mating improves the genetic level of outputs of breeding programs but this effect was not large enough to overcome the lower competitiveness associated with diversity introduction. To limit the accelerated loss of diversity, assortative mating should only be used when selection considers diversity, as in OCS.

Indexed as

BreedingGenetic VariationSelection, GeneticAnimalsFemaleMaleModels, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID42204488
PMCPMC13263942

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.