Multi-generation genomic prediction of maize yield using parametric and non-parametric sparse selection indices.


Journal

Heredity
ISSN: 1365-2540
Titre abrégé: Heredity (Edinb)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0373007

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2021
Historique:
received: 19 04 2021
accepted: 11 09 2021
revised: 10 09 2021
pubmed: 27 9 2021
medline: 27 1 2022
entrez: 26 9 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Genomic prediction models are often calibrated using multi-generation data. Over time, as data accumulates, training data sets become increasingly heterogeneous. Differences in allele frequency and linkage disequilibrium patterns between the training and prediction genotypes may limit prediction accuracy. This leads to the question of whether all available data or a subset of it should be used to calibrate genomic prediction models. Previous research on training set optimization has focused on identifying a subset of the available data that is optimal for a given prediction set. However, this approach does not contemplate the possibility that different training sets may be optimal for different prediction genotypes. To address this problem, we recently introduced a sparse selection index (SSI) that identifies an optimal training set for each individual in a prediction set. Using additive genomic relationships, the SSI can provide increased accuracy relative to genomic-BLUP (GBLUP). Non-parametric genomic models using Gaussian kernels (KBLUP) have, in some cases, yielded higher prediction accuracies than standard additive models. Therefore, here we studied whether combining SSIs and kernel methods could further improve prediction accuracy when training genomic models using multi-generation data. Using four years of doubled haploid maize data from the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), we found that when predicting grain yield the KBLUP outperformed the GBLUP, and that using SSI with additive relationships (GSSI) lead to 5-17% increases in accuracy, relative to the GBLUP. However, differences in prediction accuracy between the KBLUP and the kernel-based SSI were smaller and not always significant.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34564692
doi: 10.1038/s41437-021-00474-1
pii: 10.1038/s41437-021-00474-1
pmc: PMC8551287
doi:

Banques de données

Dryad
['10.5061/dryad.qjq2bvqgz']

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

423-432

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s).

Références

Akdemir D, Isidro-Sanchez J (2019) Design of training populations for selective phenotyping in genomic prediction. Sci Rep 9:1–15
doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-38081-6
Alvarado G, Rodríguez FM, Pacheco A, Burgueño J, Crossa J, Vargas M et al. (2020) META-R: A software to analyze data from multi-environment plant breeding trials. Crop J 8:745–756
doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2020.03.010
Atanda SA, Olsen M, Burgueño J, Crossa J, Dzidzienyo D, Beyene Y et al. (2021) Maximizing efficiency of genomic selection in CIMMYT’s tropical maize breeding program. Theor Appl Genet 134:279–294
pubmed: 33037897 doi: 10.1007/s00122-020-03696-9
Bandeira e Sousa M, Cuevas J, de Oliveira Couto EG, Perez-Rodriguez P, Jarquín D, Fritsche-Neto R et al. (2017) Genomic-enabled prediction in maize using kernel models with genotype × environment interaction. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 7:1995–2014
Bernardo R, Yu J (2007) Prospects for genomewide selection for quantitative traits in maize. Crop Sci 47:1082–1090
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2006.11.0690
Beyene Y, Gowda M, Olsen M, Robbins KR, Pérez-Rodríguez P, Alvarado G et al. (2019) Empirical comparison of tropical maize hybrids selected through genomic and phenotypic selections. Front Plant Sci 10:1–11
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01502
Buckler E, Ilut DC, Wang X, Kretzschmar T, Gore M, Mitchell SE (2016) rAmpSeq: Using repetitive sequences for robust genotyping. BioRxiv (Preprint)
Clark SA, Hickey JM, Daetwyler HD, van der Werf JHJ (2012) The importance of information on relatives for the prediction of genomic breeding values and the implications for the makeup of reference data sets in livestock breeding schemes. Genet Sel Evol 44:1–9
doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-44-4
Combs E, Bernardo R (2013) Accuracy of genomewide selection for different traits with constant population size, heritability, and number of markers. Plant Genome 6:1–7
doi: 10.3835/plantgenome2012.11.0030
Crossa J, de los Campos G, Pérez P, Gianola D, Burgueño J, Araus JL et al. (2010) Prediction of genetic values of quantitative traits in plant breeding using pedigree and molecular markers. Genetics 186:713–724
pubmed: 20813882 pmcid: 2954475 doi: 10.1534/genetics.110.118521
Cuevas J, Crossa J, Montesinos-López OA, Burgueño J, Perez-Rodriguez P, de los Campos G (2017) Bayesian genomic prediction with genotype × environment interaction kernel models. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 7:41–53
Cuevas J, Crossa J, Soberanis V, Perez-Elizalde S, Perez-Rodriguez P, de los Campos G et al. (2016) Genomic prediction of genotype × environment interaction kernel regression models. Plant Genome J 9:1–20
Cuevas J, Granato I, Fritsche-Neto R, Montesinos-López OA, Burgueño J, Bandeira e Sousa M et al. (2018) Genomic-enabled prediction Kernel models with random intercepts for multi-environment trials. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 8:1347–1365
Daetwyler HD, Villanueva B, Woolliams JA (2008) Accuracy of predicting the genetic risk of disease using a genome-wide approach. PLoS One 3:1–8
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003395
Dawson JC, Endelman JB, Heslot N, Crossa J, Poland J, Dreisigacker S et al. (2013) The use of unbalanced historical data for genomic selection in an international wheat breeding program. F Crop Res 154:12–22
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.07.020
de los Campos G, Gianola D, Rosa GJ (2009) Reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces regression: a general framework for genetic evaluation. J Anim Sci 87:1883–1887
pubmed: 19213705 doi: 10.2527/jas.2008-1259
de los Campos G, Gianola D, Rosa GJM, Weigel KA, Crossa J (2010) Semi-parametric genomic-enabled prediction of genetic values using reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces methods. Genet Res 92:295–308
doi: 10.1017/S0016672310000285
Garrick DJ (2011) The nature, scope and impact of genomic prediction in beef cattle in the United States. Genet Sel Evol 43:1–11
doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-43-17
Gianola D, Fernando RL, Stella A (2006) Genomic-assisted prediction of genetic value with semiparametric procedures. Genetics 173:1761–1776
pubmed: 16648593 pmcid: 1526664 doi: 10.1534/genetics.105.049510
Goddard M (2009) Genomic selection: Prediction of accuracy and maximisation of long term response. Genetica 136:245–257
pubmed: 18704696 doi: 10.1007/s10709-008-9308-0
González-Camacho JM, de los Campos G, Pérez P, Gianola D, Cairns JE, Mahuku G et al. (2012) Genome-enabled prediction of genetic values using radial basis function neural networks. Theor Appl Genet 125:759–771
pubmed: 22566067 pmcid: 3405257 doi: 10.1007/s00122-012-1868-9
Habier D, Fernando RL, Dekkers JCM (2007) The impact of genetic relationship information on genome-assisted breeding values. Genetics 177:2389–2397
pubmed: 18073436 pmcid: 2219482 doi: 10.1534/genetics.107.081190
Habier D, Tetens J, Seefried FR, Lichtner P, Thaller G (2010) The impact of genetic relationship information on genomic breeding values in German Holstein cattle. Genet Sel Evol 42:1–12
doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-42-5
Hayes BJ, Bowman PJ, Chamberlain AC, Verbyla K, Goddard ME (2009) Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations. Genet Sel Evol 41:51
pubmed: 19930712 pmcid: 2791750 doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-41-51
Hazel LN (1943) The genetic basis for constructing selection indexes. Genetics 28:476–490
pubmed: 17247099 pmcid: 1209225 doi: 10.1093/genetics/28.6.476
Heffner EL, Sorrells ME, Jannink J-L (2009) Genomic selection for crop improvement. Crop Sci 49:1–12
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2008.08.0512
Henderson CR (1977) Best linear unbiased prediction of breeding values not in the model for records. J Dairy Sci 60:783–787
doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(77)83935-0
Howard R, Gianola D, Montesinos-López O, Juliana P, Singh R, Poland J et al. (2019) Joint use of genome, pedigree, and their interaction with environment for predicting the performance of wheat lines in new environments. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 9:2925–2934
Jacobson A, Lian L, Zhong S, Bernardo R (2014) General combining ability model for genomewide selection in a biparental cross. Crop Sci 54:895–905
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2013.11.0774
Kim H, Grueneberg A, Vazquez AI, Hsu S, De Los Campos G (2017) Will big data close the missing heritability gap? Genetics 207:1135–1145
pubmed: 28893854 pmcid: 5676235 doi: 10.1534/genetics.117.300271
Lehermeier C, Schön CC, de los Campos G (2015) Assessment of genetic heterogeneity in structured plant populations using multivariate whole-genome regression models. Genetics 201:323–337
pubmed: 26122758 pmcid: 4566272 doi: 10.1534/genetics.115.177394
Lopez-Cruz M, de los Campos G (2021) Optimal breeding-value prediction using a Sparse Selection Index. Genetics 218:1–10
doi: 10.1093/genetics/iyab030
Lopez-Cruz M, Olson E, Rovere G, Crossa J, Dreisigacker S, Suchismita M et al. (2020) Regularized selection indices for breeding value prediction using hyper-spectral image data. Sci Rep 10:8195. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65011-2
Lorenz AJ, Smith KP (2015) Adding genetically distant individuals to training populations reduces genomic prediction accuracy in Barley. Crop Sci 55:2657–2667
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2014.12.0827
Lorenzana RE, Bernardo R (2009) Accuracy of genotypic value predictions for marker-based selection in biparental plant populations. Theor Appl Genet 120:151–161
pubmed: 19841887 doi: 10.1007/s00122-009-1166-3
Makowsky R, Pajewski NM, Klimentidis YC, Vazquez AI, Duarte CW, Allison DB et al. (2011) Beyond missing heritability: prediction of complex traits. PLoS Genet 7:1–9
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002051
Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2001) Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157:1819–1829
pubmed: 11290733 pmcid: 1461589 doi: 10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819
Morota G, Gianola D (2014) Kernel-based whole-genome prediction of complex traits: a review. Front Genet 5:1–13
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2014.00363
Olson KM, VanRaden PM, Tooker ME (2012) Multibreed genomic evaluations using purebred Holsteins, Jerseys, and Brown Swiss. J Dairy Sci 95:5378–5383
pubmed: 22916944 doi: 10.3168/jds.2011-5006
Perez P, de los Campos G (2014) Genome-wide regression and prediction with the BGLR statistical package. Genetics 198:483–495
pubmed: 25009151 pmcid: 4196607 doi: 10.1534/genetics.114.164442
Poland J, Endelman J, Dawson J, Rutkoski J, Wu S, Manes Y et al. (2012) Genomic selection in wheat breeding using genotyping-by-sequencing. Plant Genome J 5:103–113
Pszczola M, Calus MPL (2016) Updating the reference population to achieve constant genomic prediction reliability across generations. Animal 10:1018–1024
pubmed: 26711815 doi: 10.1017/S1751731115002785
R Core Team (2019) R: A Language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria
Riedelsheimer C, Endelman JB, Stange M, Sorrells ME, Jannink JL, Melchinger AE (2013) Genomic predictability of interconnected biparental maize populations. Genetics 194:493–503
pubmed: 23535384 pmcid: 3664858 doi: 10.1534/genetics.113.150227
Rincent R, Nicolas S, Altmann T, Brunel D, Revilla P, Melchinger A et al. (2012) Maximizing the reliability of genomic selection by optimizing the calibration set of reference individuals: comparison of methods in two diverse groups of maize inbreds (Zea mays L.). Genetics 192:715–728
pubmed: 22865733 pmcid: 3454892 doi: 10.1534/genetics.112.141473
Rio S, Moreau L, Charcosset A, Mary-Huard T (2020) Accounting for group-specific allele effects and admixture in genomic predictions: theory and experimental evaluation in maize. Genetics 216:27–41
pubmed: 32680885 pmcid: 7463286 doi: 10.1534/genetics.120.303278
Roth M, Muranty H, Di Guardo M, Guerra W, Patocchi A, Costa F (2020) Genomic prediction of fruit texture and training population optimization towards the application of genomic selection in apple. Hortic Res 7:148. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41438-020-00370-5
Searle SR, Casella G, McCulloch CE (1992) Variance components. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey
Smith HF (1936) A discrimant function for plant selection. Ann Eugen 7:240–250
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1936.tb02143.x
VanRaden PM (2008) Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J Dairy Sci 91:4414–4423
pubmed: 18946147 doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0980
Wientjes YCJ, Veerkamp RF, Calus MPL (2013) The effect of linkage disequilibrium and family relationships on the reliability of genomic prediction. Genetics 193:621–631
pubmed: 23267052 pmcid: 3567749 doi: 10.1534/genetics.112.146290
Wolc A, Arango J, Settar P, Fulton JE, O’Sullivan NP, Preisinger R et al. (2011) Persistence of accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values over generations in layer chickens. Genet Sel Evol 43:1–8
doi: 10.1186/1297-9686-43-23
Wolc A, Kranis A, Arango J, Settar P, Fulton JE, O’Sullivan NP et al. (2016) Implementation of genomic selection in the poultry industry. Anim Front 6:23–31
doi: 10.2527/af.2016-0004
Xu Y, Liu X, Fu J, Wang H, Wang J, Huang C et al. (2020) Enhancing genetic gain through genomic selection: from livestock to plants. Plant Commun 1:1–21
doi: 10.1016/j.xplc.2019.100005

Auteurs

Marco Lopez-Cruz (M)

Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. lopezcru@msu.edu.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. lopezcru@msu.edu.

Yoseph Beyene (Y)

Global Maize Program, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Nairobi, Kenya.

Manje Gowda (M)

Global Maize Program, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Nairobi, Kenya.

Jose Crossa (J)

Biometrics and Statistics Unit, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, Mexico.
Colegio de Postgraduados, Montecillos, Edo. de México, Mexico.

Paulino Pérez-Rodríguez (P)

Colegio de Postgraduados, Montecillos, Edo. de México, Mexico.

Gustavo de Los Campos (G)

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Department of Statistics and Probability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Institute for Quantitative Health Science and Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.

Articles similaires

Humans Macular Degeneration Mendelian Randomization Analysis Life Style Genome-Wide Association Study
Coal Metagenome Phylogeny Bacteria Genome, Bacterial
Capsicum Disease Resistance Plant Diseases Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide Ralstonia solanacearum

Classifications MeSH