EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Different methods to calculate genomic predictions--comparisons of BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP)



Different methods to calculate genomic predictions--comparisons of BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP)



Journal of Dairy Science 95(7): 4065-4073



Several strategies to use genomic data in predictions have been proposed. The aim of this study was to compare different genomic prediction methods. The response variables used in the genomic predictions were deregressed proofs, which were derived from 2 estimated breeding value (EBV) data sets. The full EBV data set from March 2010 included the EBV for production and mastitis traits for all Nordic red bulls. The reduced data set included the same animals as the full data set, but the EBV were predicted from a data set that excluded the last 5 yr of observations. Genomic predictions were obtained using different BLUP models: BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP). For the selection candidate bulls, the SNP-BLUP and G-BLUP models gave the same direct genomic breeding values (e.g., correlation of direct genomic breeding values between SNP-BLUP and G-BLUP for protein was 0.99), but slightly different from genomic EBV obtained from H-BLUP (correlations of SNP-BLUP or G-BLUP with H-BLUP were about 0.96). For all traits, SNP-BLUP and G-BLUP gave the same validation reliability, whereas H-BLUP led to slightly higher reliability. Therefore, the results support a slight advantage of using H-BLUP for genomic evaluation.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 052605703

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 22720963

DOI: 10.3168/jds.2011-4874



Related references

An alternative derivation method of mixed model equations from best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) and restricted BLUP of breeding values not using maximum likelihood. Animal Science Journal, 2018

Weighting Strategies for Single-Step Genomic BLUP: An Iterative Approach for Accurate Calculation of GEBV and GWAS. Frontiers in Genetics 7: 151-151, 2016

Sparse single-step genomic BLUP in crossbreeding schemes. Journal of Animal Science 96(6): 2060-2073, 2018

Modeling missing pedigree in single-step genomic BLUP. Journal of Dairy Science 2019, 2019

Application of single step genomic BLUP under different uncertain paternity scenarios using simulated data. Plos One 12(9): E0181752-E0181752, 2017

Hot topic: Use of genomic recursions in single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP) with a large number of genotypes. Journal of Dairy Science 98(6): 4090-4094, 2016

Use of genomic recursions and algorithm for proven and young animals for single-step genomic BLUP analyses--a simulation study. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 132(5): 340-345, 2016

Technical note: Impact of pedigree depth on convergence of single-step genomic BLUP in a purebred swine population. Journal of Animal Science 95(8): 3391-3395, 2018

Short communication: Reliability of single-step genomic BLUP breeding values by multi-trait test-day model analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 98(7): 4999-5003, 2016

Predictions in breeding of cattle with detailed representation of the BLUP methods. 1982

Weighted single-step genomic BLUP improves accuracy of genomic breeding values for protein content in French dairy goats: a quantitative trait influenced by a major gene. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 50(1): 31-31, 2018

Single-step SNP-BLUP with on-the-fly imputed genotypes and residual polygenic effects. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 49(1): 36-36, 2017

DAIRRy-BLUP: a high-performance computing approach to genomic prediction. Genetics 197(3): 813-822, 2015

Fast genomic predictions via Bayesian G-BLUP and multilocus models of threshold traits including censored Gaussian data. G3 3(9): 1511-1523, 2014

Single-Step BLUP with Varying Genotyping Effort in Open-Pollinated Picea glauca. G3 7(3): 935-942, 2017