Combining genetic resources and elite material populations to improve the accuracy of genomic prediction in apple.

Malus domestica GenPred Genomic Prediction Shared Data Resource genomic selection germplasm population combination training set design

Journal

G3 (Bethesda, Md.)
ISSN: 2160-1836
Titre abrégé: G3 (Bethesda)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101566598

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 03 2022
Historique:
received: 29 08 2021
accepted: 29 11 2021
pubmed: 12 12 2021
medline: 11 3 2022
entrez: 11 12 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Genomic selection is an attractive strategy for apple breeding that could reduce the length of breeding cycles. A possible limitation to the practical implementation of this approach lies in the creation of a training set large and diverse enough to ensure accurate predictions. In this study, we investigated the potential of combining two available populations, i.e., genetic resources and elite material, in order to obtain a large training set with a high genetic diversity. We compared the predictive ability of genomic predictions within-population, across-population or when combining both populations, and tested a model accounting for population-specific marker effects in this last case. The obtained predictive abilities were moderate to high according to the studied trait and small increases in predictive ability could be obtained for some traits when the two populations were combined into a unique training set. We also investigated the potential of such a training set to predict hybrids resulting from crosses between the two populations, with a focus on the method to design the training set and the best proportion of each population to optimize predictions. The measured predictive abilities were very similar for all the proportions, except for the extreme cases where only one of the two populations was used in the training set, in which case predictive abilities could be lower than when using both populations. Using an optimization algorithm to choose the genotypes in the training set also led to higher predictive abilities than when the genotypes were chosen at random. Our results provide guidelines to initiate breeding programs that use genomic selection when the implementation of the training set is a limitation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34893831
pii: 6459174
doi: 10.1093/g3journal/jkab420
pmc: PMC9210277
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

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

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Genetics Society of America.

Références

Theor Appl Genet. 2019 Feb;132(2):347-353
pubmed: 30390129
Genetics. 2012 Oct;192(2):715-28
pubmed: 22865733
Theor Appl Genet. 2019 Jan;132(1):81-96
pubmed: 30288553
Genet Sel Evol. 2012 Dec 07;44:39
pubmed: 23216664
J Dairy Sci. 2012 Jul;95(7):4114-29
pubmed: 22720968
Front Plant Sci. 2017 Nov 08;8:1916
pubmed: 29167677
Mol Plant. 2021 Sep 6;14(9):1454-1471
pubmed: 34022440
Theor Appl Genet. 2019 Mar;132(3):669-686
pubmed: 30569365
Front Plant Sci. 2018 Aug 06;9:1118
pubmed: 30131817
G3 (Bethesda). 2015 May 29;5(8):1603-12
pubmed: 26024866
Trends Genet. 2013 Apr;29(4):190-6
pubmed: 23428114
Genetics. 2014 Sep;198(1):3-16
pubmed: 25236445
Genetics. 2010 Jul;185(3):1021-31
pubmed: 20407128
Theor Appl Genet. 2017 Nov;130(11):2231-2247
pubmed: 28795202
Plant J. 2015 Oct;84(2):417-27
pubmed: 26358530
Genet Sel Evol. 2015 Feb 06;47:5
pubmed: 25885467
Am J Hum Genet. 2007 Nov;81(5):1084-97
pubmed: 17924348
G3 (Bethesda). 2016 Aug 09;6(8):2329-41
pubmed: 27247288
Hortic Res. 2015 Dec 23;2:15060
pubmed: 26744627
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36674
pubmed: 22574211
Theor Appl Genet. 2019 Jul;132(7):1943-1952
pubmed: 30888431
Plant J. 2016 Apr;86(1):62-74
pubmed: 26919684
Front Plant Sci. 2021 Jul 01;12:658267
pubmed: 34276721
Genetics. 2016 Feb;202(2):799-823
pubmed: 26637542
Genet Sel Evol. 2015 May 06;47:38
pubmed: 25943105
Plant Genome. 2020 Nov;13(3):e20056
pubmed: 33217206
Plant Genome. 2018 Mar;11(1):
pubmed: 29505632
Theor Appl Genet. 2015 Jan;128(1):145-58
pubmed: 25367380
G3 (Bethesda). 2016 Jul 07;6(7):1819-34
pubmed: 27172218
Hortic Res. 2018 Mar 1;5:11
pubmed: 29507735
Genetics. 2020 Sep;216(1):27-41
pubmed: 32680885
Genetics. 2013 Oct;195(2):573-87
pubmed: 23934883
Genetics. 2008 Jul;179(3):1503-12
pubmed: 18622038
Hortic Res. 2022 Feb 19;:
pubmed: 35184165
Nat Plants. 2016 Oct 03;2:16150
pubmed: 27694945
Genetics. 2001 Apr;157(4):1819-29
pubmed: 11290733
G3 (Bethesda). 2020 Jul 7;10(7):2465-2476
pubmed: 32457095
Genetics. 2009 Dec;183(4):1545-53
pubmed: 19822733
BMC Plant Biol. 2020 Jan 2;20(1):2
pubmed: 31898487
PLoS One. 2019 Feb 19;14(2):e0205629
pubmed: 30779753
Hortic Res. 2020 Sep 1;7:148
pubmed: 32922820
Am J Bot. 2021 Apr;108(4):616-627
pubmed: 33837962
Hortic Res. 2014 May 14;1:14022
pubmed: 26504538
Am J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep;81(3):559-75
pubmed: 17701901
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Jan 15;41:12
pubmed: 19284703
Plant Commun. 2019 Oct 16;1(1):100005
pubmed: 33404534
Genet Sel Evol. 2018 Oct 10;50(1):49
pubmed: 30314431
Hortic Res. 2020 Apr 1;7:47
pubmed: 32257233
Front Genet. 2021 Jun 22;12:671300
pubmed: 34239539
G3 (Bethesda). 2015 Oct 23;5(12):2711-8
pubmed: 26497141
Genet Sel Evol. 2012 Feb 09;44:4
pubmed: 22321529
Genet Sel Evol. 2019 Oct 21;51(1):58
pubmed: 31638889
Theor Appl Genet. 2019 Apr;132(4):1247-1261
pubmed: 30680419
Plant Genome. 2016 Jul;9(2):
pubmed: 27898813
Nat Commun. 2017 Aug 15;8(1):249
pubmed: 28811498
J Dairy Sci. 2008 Nov;91(11):4414-23
pubmed: 18946147
G3 (Bethesda). 2019 Mar 7;9(3):789-805
pubmed: 30651285
Theor Appl Genet. 2019 Oct;132(10):2781-2792
pubmed: 31267147
Hortic Res. 2020 Nov 1;7(1):189
pubmed: 33328447
G3 (Bethesda). 2020 Dec 3;10(12):4513-4529
pubmed: 33067307
Genetics. 2015 Sep;201(1):323-37
pubmed: 26122758
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 10;9(10):e110377
pubmed: 25303088
Metabolites. 2021 Jun 11;11(6):
pubmed: 34208114
Genet Sel Evol. 2015 Apr 02;47:24
pubmed: 25886167
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Nov 24;41:51
pubmed: 19930712
Hortic Res. 2021 Mar 1;8(1):49
pubmed: 33642580
Animal. 2016 Jun;10(6):1042-9
pubmed: 26781646

Auteurs

Xabi Cazenave (X)

Univ Angers, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRHS, SFR QuaSaV, F-49000 Angers, France.

Bernard Petit (B)

Univ Angers, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRHS, SFR QuaSaV, F-49000 Angers, France.

Marc Lateur (M)

Plant Breeding and Biodiversity, Centre Wallon de Recherches Agronomiques, Gembloux, Belgium.

Hilde Nybom (H)

Department of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Kristianstad, Sweden.

Jiri Sedlak (J)

Výzkumný a Šlechtitelský ústav Ovocnářský Holovousy s.r.o, Holovousy, Czech Republic.

Stefano Tartarini (S)

Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

François Laurens (F)

Univ Angers, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRHS, SFR QuaSaV, F-49000 Angers, France.

Charles-Eric Durel (CE)

Univ Angers, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRHS, SFR QuaSaV, F-49000 Angers, France.

Hélène Muranty (H)

Univ Angers, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRHS, SFR QuaSaV, F-49000 Angers, France.

Articles similaires

Populus Soil Microbiology Soil Microbiota Fungi
Humans Macular Degeneration Mendelian Randomization Analysis Life Style Genome-Wide Association Study

A scenario for an evolutionary selection of ageing.

Tristan Roget, Claire Macmurray, Pierre Jolivet et al.
1.00
Aging Selection, Genetic Biological Evolution Animals Fertility

Classifications MeSH