Combining large broiler populations into a single genomic evaluation: Dealing with genetic divergence1.

IF 2.7 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Journal of animal science Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI:10.1093/jas/skae360
Joe-Menwer Tabet, Fernando Bussiman, Vivian Breen, Ignacy Misztal, Daniela Lourenco
{"title":"Combining large broiler populations into a single genomic evaluation: Dealing with genetic divergence1.","authors":"Joe-Menwer Tabet, Fernando Bussiman, Vivian Breen, Ignacy Misztal, Daniela Lourenco","doi":"10.1093/jas/skae360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Combining breeding populations that have diverged at some point is a conventional practice, particularly in the poultry industry, where generation intervals are short and genetic evaluations should be frequently available. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of combining large, distantly genetically connected broiler populations into a single genomic evaluation within the single-step GBLUP framework. The pedigree data for broiler lines 1 and 2 consisted of 428,790 and 477,488 animals, being 156,088 and 186,387 genotyped, respectively. Phenotypic data for Body weight (kg), Carcass Yield (%), Mortality (1-2), and Feet Health (1-7) were collected for 397,974 animals in line 1 and 458,881 in line 2. A four-trait model was employed for the analyses, and genetic differences between the populations were addressed through different approaches: introducing an additional fixed effect accounting for the line of origin (M2) or making each fixed effect origin-specific (M3). Those models were compared against a conventional model (M1) that did not account for animal origin in the evaluation. Unknown parent groups (UPG) and Metafounders (MF) were fit to account for the genetic differences in M1, M2, and M3; they were set based on the animal's line of origin and sex. Accuracy, bias, and dispersion were used to assess the performances of the models using the Linear Regression method. Validations were performed separately within individual lines and collectively after combining the two lines to better assess the advantages of combining the two populations. Overall, the accuracy increased when the two populations were combined compared to the accuracies obtained from evaluating each line individually. Notably, there were no apparent differences among the models regarding accuracy and dispersion. Regarding bias, using models M2 or M3 with UPG yielding the least biased estimates in the combined evaluation. Thus, when combining different populations into a single genomic evaluation, accounting for the genetic and non-genetic differences among the lines ensures accurate and less biased predictions.</p>","PeriodicalId":14895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of animal science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of animal science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skae360","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Combining breeding populations that have diverged at some point is a conventional practice, particularly in the poultry industry, where generation intervals are short and genetic evaluations should be frequently available. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of combining large, distantly genetically connected broiler populations into a single genomic evaluation within the single-step GBLUP framework. The pedigree data for broiler lines 1 and 2 consisted of 428,790 and 477,488 animals, being 156,088 and 186,387 genotyped, respectively. Phenotypic data for Body weight (kg), Carcass Yield (%), Mortality (1-2), and Feet Health (1-7) were collected for 397,974 animals in line 1 and 458,881 in line 2. A four-trait model was employed for the analyses, and genetic differences between the populations were addressed through different approaches: introducing an additional fixed effect accounting for the line of origin (M2) or making each fixed effect origin-specific (M3). Those models were compared against a conventional model (M1) that did not account for animal origin in the evaluation. Unknown parent groups (UPG) and Metafounders (MF) were fit to account for the genetic differences in M1, M2, and M3; they were set based on the animal's line of origin and sex. Accuracy, bias, and dispersion were used to assess the performances of the models using the Linear Regression method. Validations were performed separately within individual lines and collectively after combining the two lines to better assess the advantages of combining the two populations. Overall, the accuracy increased when the two populations were combined compared to the accuracies obtained from evaluating each line individually. Notably, there were no apparent differences among the models regarding accuracy and dispersion. Regarding bias, using models M2 or M3 with UPG yielding the least biased estimates in the combined evaluation. Thus, when combining different populations into a single genomic evaluation, accounting for the genetic and non-genetic differences among the lines ensures accurate and less biased predictions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将大型肉鸡种群纳入单一基因组评估:处理遗传差异1。
将在某一阶段发生分化的育种群体合并起来是一种常规做法,尤其是在家禽业,因为家禽业的世代间隔较短,需要经常进行遗传评估。本研究旨在评估在单步 GBLUP 框架内,将基因联系疏远的大型肉鸡种群合并到单一基因组评估中的可行性。肉鸡品系 1 和 2 的血统数据分别为 428,790 只和 477,488 只,基因分型分别为 156,088 只和 186,387 只。1 系和 2 系分别收集了 397,974 只和 458,881 只肉鸡的体重(千克)、胴体产量(%)、死亡率(1-2)和脚健康(1-7)表型数据。分析中采用了四性状模型,并通过不同的方法来解决种群间的遗传差异:引入额外的固定效应来考虑原产地(M2),或使每个固定效应具有原产地特异性(M3)。这些模型与在评估中不考虑动物来源的传统模型(M1)进行了比较。对未知亲本组(UPG)和元基因组(MF)进行了拟合,以解释 M1、M2 和 M3 中的遗传差异;它们是根据动物的血统和性别设定的。使用线性回归法评估模型的准确性、偏差和分散性。在单个品系内分别进行了验证,并在两个品系合并后进行了集体验证,以更好地评估两个种群合并的优势。总体而言,与单独评估每个品系获得的准确率相比,合并两个种群后准确率有所提高。值得注意的是,各模型在准确性和分散性方面没有明显差异。在偏差方面,使用模型 M2 或 M3 以及 UPG 在综合评估中得出的估计值偏差最小。因此,在将不同种群合并到一个基因组评估中时,考虑到品系之间的遗传和非遗传差异,可确保预测准确且偏差较小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of animal science
Journal of animal science 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
1589
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Animal Science (JAS) is the premier journal for animal science and serves as the leading source of new knowledge and perspective in this area. JAS publishes more than 500 fully reviewed research articles, invited reviews, technical notes, and letters to the editor each year. Articles published in JAS encompass a broad range of research topics in animal production and fundamental aspects of genetics, nutrition, physiology, and preparation and utilization of animal products. Articles typically report research with beef cattle, companion animals, goats, horses, pigs, and sheep; however, studies involving other farm animals, aquatic and wildlife species, and laboratory animal species that address fundamental questions related to livestock and companion animal biology will be considered for publication.
期刊最新文献
Replacing sulfate with hydroxychloride sources of trace minerals modulated the growth performance and plasma indicators of inflammation and energy metabolism in beef heifers during periods of feed restriction and adaptation to a high-starch diet. Combining large broiler populations into a single genomic evaluation: Dealing with genetic divergence1. Factors affecting the length of productive life in U.S. Katahdin ewes. Effects of cashew nutshell extract inclusion into a high-grain finishing diet on methane emissions, nutrient digestibility, and ruminal fermentation in beef steers. Dog sniffing biomechanic responses in an odor detection test of odorants with differing physical properties
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1