پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 127 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 7,196 |
| تعداد مقالات | 77,227 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 157,268,443 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 118,428,996 |
اثر سطوح مختلف دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده در ارزیابی ssGBLUP بر صحت و پاسخ به انتخاب: یک مطالعه شبیهسازی | ||
| علوم دامی ایران | ||
| دوره 57، شماره 1، فروردین 1405، صفحه 101-112 اصل مقاله (1.76 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/ijas.2025.395855.654078 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| مهدی ایمانی1؛ حسین مرادی شهربابک* 2؛ محمد مرادی شهربابک2 | ||
| 1گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تهران، کرج، ایران. | ||
| 2گروه علوم دامی، پردیس کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه تهران، کرج، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف پژوهش حاضر، بررسی اثر سطوح مختلف دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده در ارزیابی ssGBLUP همراه با سطوح مختلف خطای شجره و وراثتپذیری صفت از طریق شبیهسازی بود. برای انجام تحقیق، صفت میانگین وزن شیرگیری برهها در طی پنج نسل شبیه سازی شد. از صحت انتخاب و پاسخ به انتخاب صفت مذکور برای مقایسه اثر سناریوهای مختلف استفاده شد. سناریوها شامل پنج سطح از دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده و دو عامل خطای شجره و وراثتپذیری، هرکدام با سه سطح بود. از نرم افزار R برای انجام این شبیهسازی استفاده شد. با افزایش درصد دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده در ارزیابی ssGBLUP، صحت انتخاب افزایش یافت ولی مقادیر عددی صحت انتخاب در سطوح مختلف وراثتپذیری اختلاف کمتری نشان داد. میانگین صحت در سناریوی دامهای فاقد اطلاعات ژنوتیپی، و سطوح مختلف خطای شجره و وراثتپذیری، 5/0 بود، و برای سناریوی با 100 درصد از دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده، معادل 79/0 بود. در سناریوی دامهای فاقد اطلاعات ژنوتایپینگ، سطوح خطای شجره ارتباط معکوسی با صحت ارزیابیهای ssGBLUP داشت. با افزایش درصد دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده، ارتباط خطای شجره با صحت ارزیابیهای ssGBLUP کمتر شد. با افزایش درصد دامهای تعیین ژنوتیپ شده، میانگین پاسخ به انتخاب نیز افزایش یافت. خطای شجره در سناریویی که تمام دامهای فاقد اطلاعات ژنوتیپی بودند اثر معنی داری را نشان داد. با افزایش درصد دامهای دارای اطلاعات ژنوتیپی، اثر خطای شجرهتصحیح شده و اثر آن بر میزان پاسخ به انتخاب کمتر شد. با توجه به نتایج حاصله از تحقیق حاضر، میتوان گفت ssGBLUP گزینه بسیار مناسبی برای تحلیل ژنتیکی جمعیتهای دامی کوچک است. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| ارزیابی تک-مرحلهای؛ خطای شجره؛ صحت انتخاب؛ شبیهسازی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The effect of different levels of genotyped animals in ssGBLUP evaluation on accuracy and response to selection: A simulation study | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| mehdi Imani1؛ Hossein Moradi Shahrbabak2؛ Mohammad Moradi shahrebabak2 | ||
| 1Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran. | ||
| 2Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The objective of this study was to investigate single step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) evaluation in different scenarios with different numbers of genotyped animals, pedigree errors and heritability using simulated data for weening weight of lambs. Different scenarios were simulated based on heritability and pedigree error, each of them with three levels, and genotyped animals based on five levels. Accuracy and response to selection were studied to compare different scenarios. The R environment was used to perform the simulation steps. With the increase in the percentage of genotyped animals in the ssGBLUP evaluation, the accuracy of selection increased and at different levels of heritability selection accuracy showed less difference. The mean accuracy in the scenario of non-genotyped animals with different levels of pedigree error and heritability was 0.5, and for the scenario with 100% of genotyped animals it was equal to 0.79. In the scenario with non-genotyped animals, pedigree error levels had an inverse relationship with the accuracy of the ssGBLUP evaluations. By increasing the percentage of genotyped animals, the effect of pedigree error with the accuracy of ssGBLUP evaluations becomes less. Also, with the increasing number of genotyped animals, response to selection mean increased. Pedigree error showed a significant effect in a scenario with non-genotyped animals. When the number of genotyped animals added the effect of pedigree error was adjusted and its effect on the response to selection rate decreased. According to obtained results, ssGBLUP evaluation is a suitable choice for genetic analysis of small animal populations. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| ssGBLUP, Pedigree error, Accuracy, Simulation | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
REFERENCES Aguilar, I., Legarra, A., Cardoso, F., Masuda, Y., Lourenco, D., & Misztal, I. (2019). Frequentist p-values for large-scale-single step genome-wide association, with an application to birth weight in American Angus cattle. Genetics Selection Evolution. 51(1): 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-019-0469-3. Aguilar, I., Misztal, I., Johnson, D.L., Legarra, A., Tsuruta, S., & Lawlor, T.J. (2010). Hot topic: A unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score. Journal of Dairy Science, 93, 743–752. doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2730. Amadeu, R. R., Garcia, A. A. F., Munoz, P. R., & Ferrão, L. F. V. (2023). AGHmatrix: genetic relationship matrices in R. Bioinformatics, 39(7), btad445. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btad445. Anonymous. (2001). The International SNP Map Working Group. A map of human genome sequence variation containing 1.42 million single nucleotide polymorphisms. Nature, 409, 928–933. https://doi.org/10.1038/35057149. Banos, G., Wiggans, G. R., & Powell, R. L. (2001). Impact of paternity errors in cow identification on genetic evaluations and international comparisons. Journal of Dairy Science. 84:2523–2529. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74703-0. Bermann, M., Cesarani, A., Misztal, I & Lourenco, D. (2022). Past, present, and future developments in single-step genomic models. Italian Journal of Animal Science. 1, 673–685. https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2022.2053366. Christensen, O.F., Borner, V., Varona, L., & Legarra, A. (2021). Genetic evaluation including intermediate omics features. Genetics. 219(2):iyab130. doi: 10.1093/genetics/iyab130. Christensen, O.F, Madsen, P., Nielsen, B., Ostersen, T., & Su, G. (2012). Single-step methods for genomic evaluation in pigs. Animal. 6(10):1565–1571. doi: 10.1017/S1751731112000742. Christensen, O.F., & Lund, M.S. (2010). Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genetics Selection Evolution, 42, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-42-2. Fernando, R.L., & Grossman, M. (1989). Marker-assisted selection using best linear unbiased prediction. Genetics Selection Evolution, 21, 467–477. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-21-4-467. Gao, H., Koivula, M., Jensen, J., Strandén, I., Madsen, P.,Pitkänen, T., Aamand, G.P., & Mäntysaari, E. A. (2018). Short communication: Genomic prediction using different single-step methods in the Finnish red dairy cattle population. Journal of Dairy Science. 101:10082–10088. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-14913. Geldermann, H., Pieper, U., & Weber, W. E. (1986). Effect of misidentification on the estimation of breeding value and heritability in cattle. Journal of Animal Science. 63:1759–1768. doi: 10.2527/jas1986.6361759x. Kaseja, K., Mucha, S., Yates, J., Smith, E., Banos, G., & Conington, J. (2022). Discovery of hidden pedigree errors combining genomic information with the genomic relationship matrix in Texel sheep. Animal, 16, 100468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2022.100468. Haley, C.S., & Vischer, P.M. (1998). Strategies to utilize marker-quantitative trait loci associations. Journal of Dairy Science, 81, 85–97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)70157-2. Imani, M., Moradi-shahrebabak, M., & Moradi-shahrebabak, H. (2024). Study levels of pedigree errors and its effect on traits genetic gain with different heritabilities. Iranian Journal of Breeding and Improvement of Livestock. Accepted for Publication. (In Persian). Lande, R., & Thompson, R. (1990). Efficiency of marker-assisted selection in the improvement of quantitative traits.Genetics, 124, 743–756. doi: 10.1093/genetics/124.3.743. Legarra, A.. Aguilar, I., & Misztal, I. (2009). A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 4656–4663. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2061. Legarra, A., Chistensen, O.F., Aguilar, I., & Misztal, I. (2014). Single step, a general approach for genomic selection. Livestock Science, 166, 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LIVSCI.2014.04.029. Liu, A., Lund, M.S., Boichard, D., Karaman, E., Guldbrandtsen, B., Fritz, S., Aamand, G.P., Nielsen, U.S., Sahana, G., & Wang Y. (2020). Weighted single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction integrating variants selected from sequencing data by association and bioinformatics analyses. Genetics Selection Evolution. 52(1):48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-020-00568-0. Lourenco, D.A., Fragomeni, B.O., Tsuruta, S., Aguilar, I., Zumbach, B., Hawken, R.J., Legarra, A., & Misztal, I. )2015(. Accuracy of estimated breeding values with genomic information on males, females, or both: an example on broiler chicken. Genetics Selection Evolution. 47(1):56. doi:10.3390/genes11070790 Lourenco, D., Legarra, A., Shogo Tsuruta, S., Masuda, Y., Aguilar, I., & Misztal, I. (2020). Single-Step Genomic Evaluations from Theory to Practice: Using SNP Chips and Sequence Data in BLUPF90. Genes, 11, 790; doi:10.3390/genes11070790. Pérez, P., & de los Campos, G. (2014). Genome-Wide Regression and Prediction with the BGLR Statistical Package. Genomic Science. 198, 483–495. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.114.164442. Masuda, Y., VanRaden, P.M., Tsuruta, S., Lourenco, D., & Misztal, I. )2021(. Invited review: unknown-parent groups and metafounders in single-step genomic BLUP. Journal of Dairy Science.105(2):923-939. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-20293. Meuwissen, T.H.E., Hayes, B.J., & Goddard, M.E. (2001). Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics, 157, 1819–1829. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819. Misztal, I., Tsuruta, S., Lourenco, D,A.L., Masuda, Y., Aguilar, I., Legarra, A., & Vitezica, Z. (2014). Manual for BLUPF90 family of programs. http://nce.ads.uga.edu/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=blupf90_all8.pdf. Misztal, I., Legarra, A., & Aguilar, I. (2009). Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic,full pedigree, and genomic information. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 4648–4655. doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2064. Munoz, P. R., Resende, MF.R., Huber, D.A., Quesada, T., Kirst, M., & Peter, G.F. (2014). Genomic Relationship Matrix for Correcting Pedigree Errors in Breeding Populations: Impact on Genetic Parameters and Genomic Selection Accuracy. Published in Crop Science. 53:1115–1123. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2012.12.0673. Soller, M., & Beckmann, J.S. (1983). Genetic polymorphism in varietal identification and genetic improvement. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 67, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00303917. Schork, N.J., Fallin, D., & Lanchbury, S. (2000). Single nucleotide polymorphisms and the future of genetic epidemiology. Clinical Genetics, 58, 250–264. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-0004.2000.580402.x. Stonecking, M. (2001). From the evolutionary past. Nature, 409, 821–822. doi: 10.1038/35057279. Tonussi, R.L., Silva, R.M.O., Magalhães, A.F.B., Espigolan, R., Peripolli, E., Olivieri, B.F., Feitosa, F.L.B., Lemos, M.V.A., Berton, M.P., Chiaia, H.L.J., Pereira, A.S.C., Loˆbo, R. B., Bezerra, L.A.F., Magnabosco, C.U., Lourenc, D.A.L., Aguilar, I., & Baldi, F. (2017). Application of single step genomic BLUP under different uncertain paternity scenarios using simulated data. PLoS ONE, 12(9): e0181752. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181752. Wiggans, G.R., VanRaden, P.M., & Cooper, T.A. (2012). Technical note: Adjustment of all cow evaluations for yield traits to be comparable with bull evaluations. Journal of Dairy Science, 95, 3444–3447. doi: 10.3168/jds.2011-5000. VanRaden, P.M., Tooker, M.E., Chud, T., Norman, H.D., Megonigal, J.H., Haagen, I.W., & Wiggans, G.R. (2020). Genomic predictions for crossbred dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. 103(2): 1620–1631. doi: 10.3168/jds.2019-16634. VanRaden, P.M. (2008). Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. Journal of Dairy Science, 91, 4414–4423. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0980. Visscher, P. M., Woolliams, J. A., Smith, D., & Williams, J. L. (2002). Estimation of pedigree rrrors in the UK dairy population using microsatellite markers and the impact on selection. Journal of Dairy Science. 85:2368–2375. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74317-8. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 188 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 178 |
||
سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب