Bayesian neural networks with variable selection for prediction of genotypic values.
Algorithms
Alleles
Animals
Bayes Theorem
Forecasting
/ methods
Gene Frequency
/ genetics
Genetics, Population
/ methods
Genomics
/ methods
Genotype
Humans
Models, Genetic
Multifactorial Inheritance
/ genetics
Neural Networks, Computer
Phenotype
Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide
/ genetics
Quantitative Trait Loci
/ genetics
Selection, Genetic
/ genetics
Journal
Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE
ISSN: 1297-9686
Titre abrégé: Genet Sel Evol
Pays: France
ID NLM: 9114088
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 May 2020
15 May 2020
Historique:
received:
27
09
2019
accepted:
28
04
2020
entrez:
17
5
2020
pubmed:
18
5
2020
medline:
7
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Estimating the genetic component of a complex phenotype is a complicated problem, mainly because there are many allele effects to estimate from a limited number of phenotypes. In spite of this difficulty, linear methods with variable selection have been able to give good predictions of additive effects of individuals. However, prediction of non-additive genetic effects is challenging with the usual prediction methods. In machine learning, non-additive relations between inputs can be modeled with neural networks. We developed a novel method (NetSparse) that uses Bayesian neural networks with variable selection for the prediction of genotypic values of individuals, including non-additive genetic effects. We simulated several populations with different phenotypic models and compared NetSparse to genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), BayesB, their dominance variants, and an additive by additive method. We found that when the number of QTL was relatively small (10 or 100), NetSparse had 2 to 28 percentage points higher accuracy than the reference methods. For scenarios that included dominance or epistatic effects, NetSparse had 0.0 to 3.9 percentage points higher accuracy for predicting phenotypes than the reference methods, except in scenarios with extreme overdominance, for which reference methods that explicitly model dominance had 6 percentage points higher accuracy than NetSparse. Bayesian neural networks with variable selection are promising for prediction of the genetic component of complex traits in animal breeding, and their performance is robust across different genetic models. However, their large computational costs can hinder their use in practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Estimating the genetic component of a complex phenotype is a complicated problem, mainly because there are many allele effects to estimate from a limited number of phenotypes. In spite of this difficulty, linear methods with variable selection have been able to give good predictions of additive effects of individuals. However, prediction of non-additive genetic effects is challenging with the usual prediction methods. In machine learning, non-additive relations between inputs can be modeled with neural networks. We developed a novel method (NetSparse) that uses Bayesian neural networks with variable selection for the prediction of genotypic values of individuals, including non-additive genetic effects.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We simulated several populations with different phenotypic models and compared NetSparse to genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), BayesB, their dominance variants, and an additive by additive method. We found that when the number of QTL was relatively small (10 or 100), NetSparse had 2 to 28 percentage points higher accuracy than the reference methods. For scenarios that included dominance or epistatic effects, NetSparse had 0.0 to 3.9 percentage points higher accuracy for predicting phenotypes than the reference methods, except in scenarios with extreme overdominance, for which reference methods that explicitly model dominance had 6 percentage points higher accuracy than NetSparse.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Bayesian neural networks with variable selection are promising for prediction of the genetic component of complex traits in animal breeding, and their performance is robust across different genetic models. However, their large computational costs can hinder their use in practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32414320
doi: 10.1186/s12711-020-00544-8
pii: 10.1186/s12711-020-00544-8
pmc: PMC7227313
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
26Subventions
Organisme : Stichting voor de Technische Wetenschappen
ID : 14291
Références
Genetics. 2010 Jul;185(3):1021-31
pubmed: 20407128
BMC Genet. 2011 Oct 07;12:87
pubmed: 21981731
Bioinformatics. 2009 Mar 1;25(5):680-1
pubmed: 19176551
Genetics. 1954 Nov;39(6):859-82
pubmed: 17247525
BMC Genet. 2011 Aug 25;12:74
pubmed: 21867519
Genet Res (Camb). 2012 Feb;94(1):21-37
pubmed: 22353246
J Anim Breed Genet. 1997 Jan 12;114(1-6):163-75
pubmed: 21395812
Theor Appl Genet. 2012 Oct;125(6):1181-94
pubmed: 22733443
BMC Bioinformatics. 2011 May 23;12:186
pubmed: 21605355
Genet Res (Camb). 2011 Apr;93(2):139-54
pubmed: 21481291
Genet Res (Camb). 2011 Jun;93(3):189-201
pubmed: 21481292
J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2016 Feb 11;7:7
pubmed: 26870325
Bioinformatics. 2016 May 1;32(9):1420-2
pubmed: 26755623
Genet Sel Evol. 2013 Sep 11;45:34
pubmed: 24024641
Genet Sel Evol. 2018 Dec 22;50(1):70
pubmed: 30577737
IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1984 Jun;6(6):721-41
pubmed: 22499653
Genetics. 2006 Jul;173(3):1761-76
pubmed: 16648593
Genetics. 2001 Apr;157(4):1819-29
pubmed: 11290733
Genet Sel Evol. 2017 Jan 4;49(1):1
pubmed: 28093066
J Anim Sci. 2018 May 4;96(5):2016-2026
pubmed: 29529218
Genetics. 2017 Jul;206(3):1297-1307
pubmed: 28522540
PLoS Genet. 2008 Feb 29;4(2):e1000008
pubmed: 18454194
J Dairy Sci. 2008 Nov;91(11):4414-23
pubmed: 18946147
Genetics. 2014 Oct;198(2):483-95
pubmed: 25009151