Modeling relationships between calving traits: a comparison between standard and recursive mixed models

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The use of structural equation models for the analysis of recursive and simultaneous relationships between phenotypes has become more popular recently. The aim of this paper is to illustrate how these models can be applied in animal breeding to achieve parameterizations of different levels of complexity and, more specifically, to model phenotypic recursion between three calving traits: gestation length (GL), calving difficulty (CD) and stillbirth (SB). All recursive models considered here postulate heterogeneous recursive relationships between GL and liabilities to CD and SB, and between liability to CD and liability to SB, depending on categories of GL phenotype.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Four models were compared in terms of goodness of fit and predictive ability: 1) standard mixed model (SMM), a model with unstructured (co)variance matrices; 2) recursive mixed model 1 (RMM1), assuming that residual correlations are due to the recursive relationships between phenotypes; 3) RMM2, assuming that correlations between residuals and contemporary groups are due to recursive relationships between phenotypes; and 4) RMM3, postulating that the correlations between genetic effects, contemporary groups and residuals are due to recursive relationships between phenotypes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For all the RMM considered, the estimates of the structural coefficients were similar. Results revealed a nonlinear relationship between GL and the liabilities both to CD and to SB, and a linear relationship between the liabilities to CD and SB.</p> <p>Differences in terms of goodness of fit and predictive ability of the models considered were negligible, suggesting that RMM3 is plausible.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The applications examined in this study suggest the plausibility of a nonlinear recursive effect from GL onto CD and SB. Also, the fact that the most restrictive model RMM3, which assumes that the only cause of correlation is phenotypic recursion, performs as well as the others indicates that the phenotypic recursion may be an important cause of the observed patterns of genetic and environmental correlations.</p

Searching for phenotypic causal networks involving complex traits: an application to European quail

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Structural equation models (SEM) are used to model multiple traits and the casual links among them. The number of different causal structures that can be used to fit a SEM is typically very large, even when only a few traits are studied. In recent applications of SEM in quantitative genetics mixed model settings, causal structures were pre-selected based on prior beliefs alone. Alternatively, there are algorithms that search for structures that are compatible with the joint distribution of the data. However, such a search cannot be performed directly on the joint distribution of the phenotypes since causal relationships are possibly masked by genetic covariances. In this context, the application of the Inductive Causation (IC) algorithm to the joint distribution of phenotypes conditional to unobservable genetic effects has been proposed.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Here, we applied this approach to five traits in European quail: birth weight (BW), weight at 35 days of age (W35), age at first egg (AFE), average egg weight from 77 to 110 days of age (AEW), and number of eggs laid in the same period (NE). We have focused the discussion on the challenges and difficulties resulting from applying this method to field data. Statistical decisions regarding partial correlations were based on different Highest Posterior Density (HPD) interval contents and models based on the selected causal structures were compared using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC). In addition, we used temporal information to perform additional edge orienting, overriding the algorithm output when necessary.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>As a result, the final causal structure consisted of two separated substructures: BW→AEW and W35→AFE→NE, where an arrow represents a direct effect. Comparison between a SEM with the selected structure and a Multiple Trait Animal Model using DIC indicated that the SEM is more plausible.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Coupling prior knowledge with the output provided by the IC algorithm allowed further learning regarding phenotypic causal structures when compared to standard mixed effects SEM applications.</p

Bayesian analysis and prediction of hybrid performance

Background The selection of hybrids is an essential step in maize breeding. However, evaluating a large number of hybrids in field trials can be extremely costly. However, genomic models can be used to predict the expected performance of un-tested genotypes. Bayesian models offer a very flexible framework for hybrid prediction. The Bayesian methodology can be used with parametric and semi-parametric assumptions for additive and non-additive effects. Furthermore, samples from the posterior distribution of Bayesian models can be used to estimate the variance due to general and specific combining abilities even in cases where additive and non-additive effects are not mutually orthogonal. Also, the use of Bayesian models for analysis and prediction of hybrid performance has remained fairly limited. Results We provided an overview of Bayesian parametric and semi-parametric genomic models for prediction of agronomic traits in maize hybrids and discussed how these models can be used to decompose the genotypic variance into components due to general and specific combining ability. We applied the methodology to data from 906 single cross tropical maize hybrids derived from a convergent population. Our results show that: (1) non-additive effects make a sizable contribution to the genetic variance of grain yield; however, the relative importance of non-additive effects was much smaller for ear and plant height; (2) genomic prediction can achieve relatively high accuracy in predicting phenotypes of un-tested hybrids and in pre-screening. Conclusions Genomic prediction can be a useful tool in pre-screening of hybrids and could contribute to the improvement of the efficiency and efficacy of maize hybrids breeding programs. The Bayesian framework offers a great deal of flexibility in modeling hybrid performance. The methodology can be used to estimate important genetic parameters and render predictions of the expected hybrid performance as well measures of uncertainty about such predictions

A two step Bayesian approach for genomic prediction of breeding values

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In genomic models that assign an individual variance to each marker, the contribution of one marker to the posterior distribution of the marker variance is only one degree of freedom (df), which introduces many variance parameters with only little information per variance parameter. A better alternative could be to form clusters of markers with similar effects where markers in a cluster have a common variance. Therefore, the influence of each marker group of size <it>p </it>on the posterior distribution of the marker variances will be <it>p </it>df.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The simulated data from the 15^thQTL-MAS workshop were analyzed such that SNP markers were ranked based on their effects and markers with similar estimated effects were grouped together. In step 1, all markers with minor allele frequency more than 0.01 were included in a SNP-BLUP prediction model. In step 2, markers were ranked based on their estimated variance on the trait in step 1 and each 150 markers were assigned to one group with a common variance. In further analyses, subsets of 1500 and 450 markers with largest effects in step 2 were kept in the prediction model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Grouping markers outperformed SNP-BLUP model in terms of accuracy of predicted breeding values. However, the accuracies of predicted breeding values were lower than Bayesian methods with marker specific variances.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Grouping markers is less flexible than allowing each marker to have a specific marker variance but, by grouping, the power to estimate marker variances increases. A prior knowledge of the genetic architecture of the trait is necessary for clustering markers and appropriate prior parameterization.</p

Genomic prediction in CIMMYT maize and wheat breeding programs

Genomic selection (GS) has been implemented in animal and plant species, and is regarded as a useful tool for accelerating genetic gains. Varying levels of genomic prediction accuracy have been obtained in plants, depending on the prediction problem assessed and on several other factors, such as trait heritability, the relationship between the individuals to be predicted and those used to train the models for prediction, number of markers, sample size and genotype × environment interaction (GE). The main objective of this article is to describe the results of genomic prediction in International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center's (CIMMYT's) maize and wheat breeding programs, from the initial assessment of the predictive ability of different models using pedigree and marker information to the present, when methods for implementing GS in practical global maize and wheat breeding programs are being studied and investigated. Results show that pedigree (population structure) accounts for a sizeable proportion of the prediction accuracy when a global population is the prediction problem to be assessed. However, when the prediction uses unrelated populations to train the prediction equations, prediction accuracy becomes negligible. When genomic prediction includes modeling GE, an increase in prediction accuracy can be achieved by borrowing information from correlated environments. Several questions on how to incorporate GS into CIMMYT's maize and wheat programs remain unanswered and subject to further investigation, for example, prediction within and between related bi-parental crosses. Further research on the quantification of breeding value components for GS in plant breeding populations is required.J Crossa, P Pérez, J Hickey, J Burgueño, L Ornella, J Cerón-Rojas, X Zhang, S Dreisigacker, R Babu, Y Li, D Bonnett and K Mathew