An Integrative Genomic Prediction Approach for Predicting Buffalo Milk Traits by Incorporating Related Cattle QTLs.
buffalo
enrichment
genomic prediction
linear mixed model
pGBLUP
prior biological information
Journal
Genes
ISSN: 2073-4425
Titre abrégé: Genes (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101551097
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 08 2022
11 08 2022
Historique:
received:
12
07
2022
revised:
08
08
2022
accepted:
09
08
2022
entrez:
26
8
2022
pubmed:
27
8
2022
medline:
30
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Background: The 90K Axiom Buffalo SNP Array is expected to improve and speed up various genomic analyses for the buffalo (Bubalus bubalis). Genomic prediction is an effective approach in animal breeding to improve selection and reduce costs. As buffalo genome research is lagging behind that of the cow and production records are also limited, genomic prediction performance will be relatively poor. To improve the genomic prediction in buffalo, we introduced a new approach (pGBLUP) for genomic prediction of six buffalo milk traits by incorporating QTL information from the cattle milk traits in order to help improve the prediction performance for buffalo. Results: In simulations, the pGBLUP could outperform BayesR and the GBLUP if the prior biological information (i.e., the known causal loci) was appropriate; otherwise, it performed slightly worse than BayesR and equal to or better than the GBLUP. In real data, the heritability of the buffalo genomic region corresponding to the cattle milk trait QTLs was enriched (fold of enrichment > 1) in four buffalo milk traits (FY270, MY270, PY270, and PM) when the EBV was used as the response variable. The DEBV as the response variable yielded more reliable genomic predictions than the traditional EBV, as has been shown by previous research. The performance of the three approaches (GBLUP, BayesR, and pGBLUP) did not vary greatly in this study, probably due to the limited sample size, incomplete prior biological information, and less artificial selection in buffalo. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first to apply genomic prediction to buffalo by incorporating prior biological information. The genomic prediction of buffalo traits can be further improved with a larger sample size, higher-density SNP chips, and more precise prior biological information.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36011341
pii: genes13081430
doi: 10.3390/genes13081430
pmc: PMC9408041
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5350
pubmed: 19390634
BMC Genomics. 2017 Aug 10;18(1):604
pubmed: 28797230
Biochem Genet. 2007 Aug;45(7-8):611-21
pubmed: 17592768
Genet Mol Res. 2015 Dec 22;14(4):18009-17
pubmed: 26782448
Genome Res. 2014 Sep;24(9):1550-7
pubmed: 24963154
Nat Rev Genet. 2016 Jul;17(7):392-406
pubmed: 27140283
Nat Commun. 2017 Sep 6;8(1):456
pubmed: 28878256
BMC Genet. 2012 Jun 13;13:44
pubmed: 22694746
J Dairy Sci. 2013 Sep;96(9):5923-32
pubmed: 23831097
PLoS Genet. 2013;9(7):e1003608
pubmed: 23874214
BMC Genomics. 2016 Feb 27;17:144
pubmed: 26920147
PLoS Genet. 2013;9(2):e1003264
pubmed: 23408905
Sci Rep. 2017 Feb 09;7:42091
pubmed: 28181587
J Dairy Sci. 2012 Jul;95(7):4114-29
pubmed: 22720968
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 30;7:45560
pubmed: 28358110
Nat Genet. 2017 Aug 30;49(9):1297-1303
pubmed: 28854179
Genet Sel Evol. 2017 May 12;49(1):44
pubmed: 28499345
Ann Appl Stat. 2017 Dec;11(4):2027-2051
pubmed: 29515717
PLoS One. 2010 Sep 09;5(9):
pubmed: 20844593
Nat Rev Genet. 2019 Mar;20(3):135-156
pubmed: 30514919
Gene. 2014 May 1;540(2):133-9
pubmed: 24613755
PLoS Genet. 2015 Apr 07;11(4):e1004969
pubmed: 25849665
Genet Sel Evol. 2017 Jul 26;49(1):59
pubmed: 28747171
Genet Sel Evol. 2011 Nov 09;43:38
pubmed: 22070746
Genome Biol. 2020 Jun 17;21(1):146
pubmed: 32552725
J Dairy Sci. 2010 May;93(5):2195-201
pubmed: 20412935
Genet Sel Evol. 2015 Jul 14;47:60
pubmed: 26169777
Genetics. 2016 Aug;203(4):1901-13
pubmed: 27317683
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Jan;101(1):433-444
pubmed: 29128211
Am J Hum Genet. 2017 Aug 3;101(2):218-226
pubmed: 28757202
Am J Hum Genet. 2014 Nov 6;95(5):535-52
pubmed: 25439723
Am J Hum Genet. 2011 Jan 7;88(1):76-82
pubmed: 21167468
Vet World. 2015 Mar;8(3):320-5
pubmed: 27047091
J Dairy Res. 2017 Nov;84(4):434-439
pubmed: 28929983
Nucleic Acids Res. 2016 Jan 4;44(D1):D827-33
pubmed: 26602686
Anim Genet. 2017 Dec;48(6):720-721
pubmed: 29023847
Trop Anim Health Prod. 2015 Apr;47(4):643-7
pubmed: 25677166
G3 (Bethesda). 2015 Feb 09;5(4):615-27
pubmed: 25670771
Nat Genet. 2015 Nov;47(11):1228-35
pubmed: 26414678
Genetics. 2001 Apr;157(4):1819-29
pubmed: 11290733
Nat Rev Genet. 2009 Jun;10(6):381-91
pubmed: 19448663
BMC Bioinformatics. 2011 May 23;12:186
pubmed: 21605355
PLoS Genet. 2016 Feb 01;12(2):e1005767
pubmed: 26828793
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 24;9(3):e93017
pubmed: 24663104
J Anim Sci. 2015 Aug;93(8):3801-9
pubmed: 26440159
Genet Sel Evol. 2009 Dec 31;41:55
pubmed: 20043827
Am J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep;81(3):559-75
pubmed: 17701901
Genetics. 2017 Oct;207(2):489-501
pubmed: 28839043
Genet Mol Biol. 2011 Jan;34(1):62-7
pubmed: 21637545
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 5;12(10):e0185220
pubmed: 28981529
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 30;9(1):e87666
pubmed: 24498162
Int J Biol Sci. 2010 Dec 30;7(1):18-27
pubmed: 21209788
BMC Genomics. 2015 Oct 28;16:872
pubmed: 26510479
Genet Sel Evol. 2015 Apr 17;47:29
pubmed: 25887988