Whole genome amplification: Use of advanced isothermal method

Laboratory method for amplifying genomic deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) samples aiming to generate more amounts and sufficient quantity DNA for subsequent specific analysis is named whole genome amplification (WGA). This method is only way to increase input material from few cells and limited DNA contents. While PCR-based WGA methods have been under continuous development for over a decade, shortcomings of these methods enforced many researchers to switch to the use of non-PCR-based linear amplification techniques. Moreover, application of high fidelity and high possessive DNA polymerases enabled development of an isothermal WGA technique named multiple displacement amplification (MDA). MDA is not based on PCR and doses not require thermal cycling. It should be noted that, while MDA-based techniques proposed aiming to overcome the drawbacks of PCR-based methods however, MDA is still facing some challenges. It seems that PCR-based WGA methods alsohave some merits. One of the problems which encountered both MDA and PCR-based methods is in the amplification of degraded DNA templates. WGA methods such as T7-based linear amplification of DNA(TLAD), balanced-PCR amplification and restriction and circularization-aided rolling circle amplification (RCA-RCA) have been suggested to aim at amplification of such DNA templates.Keywords: Whole genome amplification, multiple displacement amplification (MDA), non PCR-based method

Imputation of Missing Genotypes from Sparse to High Density Using Long-Range Phasing

Related individuals share potentially long chromosome segments that trace to a common ancestor. We describe a phasing algorithm (ChromoPhase) that utilizes this characteristic of finite populations to phase large sections of a chromosome. In addition to phasing, our method imputes missing genotypes in individuals genotyped at lower marker density when more densely genotyped relatives are available. ChromoPhase uses a pedigree to collect an individual's (the proband) surrogate parents and offspring and uses genotypic similarity to identify its genomic surrogates. The algorithm then cycles through the relatives and genomic surrogates one at a time to find shared chromosome segments. Once a segment has been identified, any missing information in the proband is filled in with information from the relative. We tested ChromoPhase in a simulated population consisting of 400 individuals at a marker density of 1500/M, which is approximately equivalent to a 50K bovine single nucleotide polymorphism chip. In simulated data, 99.9% loci were correctly phased and, when imputing from 100 to 1500 markers, more than 87% of missing genotypes were correctly imputed. Performance increased when the number of generations available in the pedigree increased, but was reduced when the sparse genotype contained fewer loci. However, in simulated data, ChromoPhase correctly imputed at least 12% more genotypes than fastPHASE, depending on sparse marker density. We also tested the algorithm in a real Holstein cattle data set to impute 50K genotypes in animals with a sparse 3K genotype. In these data 92% of genotypes were correctly imputed in animals with a genotyped sire. We evaluated the accuracy of genomic predictions with the dense, sparse, and imputed simulated data sets and show that the reduction in genomic evaluation accuracy is modest even with imperfectly imputed genotype data. Our results demonstrate that imputation of missing genotypes, and potentially full genome sequence, using long-range phasing is feasible

International genomic evaluation methods for dairy cattle

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Genomic evaluations are rapidly replacing traditional evaluation systems used for dairy cattle selection. Higher reliabilities from larger genotype files promote cooperation across country borders. Genomic information can be exchanged across countries using simple conversion equations, by modifying multi-trait across-country evaluation (MACE) to account for correlated residuals originating from the use of foreign evaluations, or by multi-trait analysis of genotypes for countries that use the same reference animals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Traditional MACE assumes independent residuals because each daughter is measured in only one country. Genomic MACE could account for residual correlations using daughter equivalents from genomic data as a fraction of the total in each country and proportions of bulls shared. MACE methods developed to combine separate within-country genomic evaluations were compared to direct, multi-country analysis of combined genotypes using simulated genomic and phenotypic data for 8,193 bulls in nine countries.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Reliabilities for young bulls were much higher for across-country than within-country genomic evaluations as measured by squared correlations of estimated with true breeding values. Gains in reliability from genomic MACE were similar to those of multi-trait evaluation of genotypes but required less computation. Sharing of reference genotypes among countries created large residual correlations, especially for young bulls, that are accounted for in genomic MACE.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>International genomic evaluations can be computed either by modifying MACE to account for residual correlations across countries or by multi-trait evaluation of combined genotype files. The gains in reliability justify the increased computation but require more cooperation than in previous breeding programs.</p

Accuracy of genomic breeding values in multi-breed dairy cattle populations

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Two key findings from genomic selection experiments are 1) the reference population used must be very large to subsequently predict accurate genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV), and 2) prediction equations derived in one breed do not predict accurate GEBV when applied to other breeds. Both findings are a problem for breeds where the number of individuals in the reference population is limited. A multi-breed reference population is a potential solution, and here we investigate the accuracies of GEBV in Holstein dairy cattle and Jersey dairy cattle when the reference population is single breed or multi-breed. The accuracies were obtained both as a function of elements of the inverse coefficient matrix and from the realised accuracies of GEBV.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Best linear unbiased prediction with a multi-breed genomic relationship matrix (GBLUP) and two Bayesian methods (BAYESA and BAYES_SSVS) which estimate individual SNP effects were used to predict GEBV for 400 and 77 young Holstein and Jersey bulls respectively, from a reference population of 781 and 287 Holstein and Jersey bulls, respectively. Genotypes of 39,048 SNP markers were used. Phenotypes in the reference population were de-regressed breeding values for production traits. For the GBLUP method, expected accuracies calculated from the diagonal of the inverse of coefficient matrix were compared to realised accuracies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>When GBLUP was used, expected accuracies from a function of elements of the inverse coefficient matrix agreed reasonably well with realised accuracies calculated from the correlation between GEBV and EBV in single breed populations, but not in multi-breed populations. When the Bayesian methods were used, realised accuracies of GEBV were up to 13% higher when the multi-breed reference population was used than when a pure breed reference was used. However no consistent increase in accuracy across traits was obtained.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Predicting genomic breeding values using a genomic relationship matrix is an attractive approach to implement genomic selection as expected accuracies of GEBV can be readily derived. However in multi-breed populations, Bayesian approaches give higher accuracies for some traits. Finally, multi-breed reference populations will be a valuable resource to fine map QTL.</p

Best Linear Unbiased Prediction of Genomic Breeding Values Using a Trait-Specific Marker-Derived Relationship Matrix

With the availability of high density whole-genome single nucleotide polymorphism chips, genomic selection has become a promising method to estimate genetic merit with potentially high accuracy for animal, plant and aquaculture species of economic importance. With markers covering the entire genome, genetic merit of genotyped individuals can be predicted directly within the framework of mixed model equations, by using a matrix of relationships among individuals that is derived from the markers. Here we extend that approach by deriving a marker-based relationship matrix specifically for the trait of interest

Use and optimization of different sources of information for genomic prediction

Abstract Background Molecular data is now commonly used to predict breeding values (BV). Various methods to calculate genomic relationship matrices (GRM) have been developed, with some studies proposing regression of coefficients back to the reference matrix of pedigree-based relationship coefficients (A). The objective was to compare the utility of two GRM: a matrix based on linkage analysis (LA) and anchored to the pedigree, i.e. $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LA}}}} ,$$ G LA , and a matrix based on linkage disequilibrium (LD), i.e. $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LD}}}}$$ G LD , using genomic and phenotypic data collected on 5416 broiler chickens. Furthermore, the effects of regressing the coefficients of $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LD}}}}$$ G LD back to A (LDA) and to $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LA}}}}$$ G LA (LDLA) were evaluated, using a range of weighting factors. The performance of the matrices and their composite products was assessed by the fit of the models to the data, and the empirical accuracy and bias of the BV that they predicted. The sensitivity to marker choice was examined by using two chips of equal density but including different single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Results The likelihood of models using GRM and composite matrices exceeded the likelihood of models based on pedigree alone and was highest with intermediate weighting factors for both the LDA and LDLA approaches. For these data, empirical accuracies were not strongly affected by the weighting factors, although they were highest when different sources of information were combined. The optimum weighting factors depended on the type of matrices used, as well as on the choice of SNPs from which the GRM were constructed. Prediction bias was strongly affected by the chip used and less by the form of the GRM. Conclusions Our findings provide an empirical comparison of the efficacy of pedigree and genomic predictions in broiler chickens and examine the effects of fitting GRM with coefficients regressed back to a reference anchored to the pedigree, either A or $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LA}}}}$$ G LA . For the analysed dataset, the best results were obtained when $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LD}}}}$$ G LD was combined with relationships in A or $${\mathbf{G}}_{{{\mathbf{LA}}}}$$ G LA , with optimum weighting factors that depended on the choice of SNPs used. The optimum weighting factor for broiler body weight differed from weighting factors that were based on the density of SNPs and theoretically derived using generalised assumptions