Increasing long-term response to selection

Selection on estimated breeding value (EBV) alone maximises response to selection observed in the next generation, but repeated use of this selection criterion does not necessarily result in a maximum response over a longer time horizon. Selection decisions made in the current generation have at least 2 consequences. Firstly, they influence the immediate genetic response to selection and, secondly, they influence the inbreeding of the next and subsequent generations. Accumulation of inbreeding has a negative impact on future genetic response through reduction in future genetic variance and a negative impact on future performance if inbreeding depression affects the selected trait. Optimum selection decisions depend on the time horizon of interest. If this is known, then a breeding objective can be defined. A selection criterion is proposed in which the positive contributions of a selected group of parents to immediate genetic response (determined by their average EBV) is balanced against their negative contribution to future genetic response (determined by their contribution to inbreeding). The value assigned to the contribution to inbreeding is derived from the breeding objective. Selection of related individuals will be restricted if the detrimental value associated with inbreeding is high; restrictions on the selection of sibs, however, is flexible from family to family depending on their genetic merit. A selection algorithm is proposed which uses the selection criterion to select sires on 3 selection strategies, to select on i) a fixed number of sires; ii) a variable number of sires each allocated an equal number of matings; or iii) a variable number of sires allocated an optimal proportion of matings. Using stochastic simulation, these selection strategies for sires are compared with selection on EBV alone. When compared at the time horizon specified by the selection goal, the proposed selection criterion is successful in ensuring a higher response to selection at a lower level of inbreeding despite the selection of fewer sires. The selection strategy iii) exploits random year-to-year variations in the availability of individuals for selection and is successful in maximising response to the selection goal. The derivation of the value assigned to inbreeding is not exact and cannot guarantee that the overall maximum response is found. However, simulation results suggest that the response is robust to the detrimental value assigned to inbreeding

An overview of DNA methylation-derived trait score methods and applications

This is the final version. Available on open access from BMC via the DOI in this recordMicroarray technology has been used to measure genome-wide DNA methylation in thousands of individuals. These studies typically test the associations between individual DNA methylation sites ("probes") and complex traits or diseases. The results can be used to generate methylation profile scores (MPS) to predict outcomes in independent data sets. Although there are many parallels between MPS and polygenic (risk) scores (PGS), there are key differences. Here, we review motivations, methods, and applications of DNA methylation-based trait prediction, with a focus on common diseases. We contrast MPS with PGS, highlighting where assumptions made in genetic modeling may not hold in epigenetic data.University of Queensland/University of Exeter (QUEX)National Health and Medical Research CouncilWellcome Trus

Underestimated Effect Sizes in GWAS: Fundamental Limitations of Single SNP Analysis for Dichotomous Phenotypes

Complex diseases are often highly heritable. However, for many complex traits only a small proportion of the heritability can be explained by observed genetic variants in traditional genome-wide association (GWA) studies. Moreover, for some of those traits few significant SNPs have been identified. Single SNP association methods test for association at a single SNP, ignoring the effect of other SNPs. We show using a simple multi-locus odds model of complex disease that moderate to large effect sizes of causal variants may be estimated as relatively small effect sizes in single SNP association testing. This underestimation effect is most severe for diseases influenced by numerous risk variants. We relate the underestimation effect to the concept of non-collapsibility found in the statistics literature. As described, continuous phenotypes generated with linear genetic models are not affected by this underestimation effect. Since many GWA studies apply single SNP analysis to dichotomous phenotypes, previously reported results potentially underestimate true effect sizes, thereby impeding identification of true effect SNPs. Therefore, when a multi-locus model of disease risk is assumed, a multi SNP analysis may be more appropriate

Accuracy of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals predicted by dense SNP genotyping

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recent developments in SNP discovery and high throughput genotyping technology have made the use of high-density SNP markers to predict breeding values feasible. This involves estimation of the SNP effects in a training data set, and use of these estimates to evaluate the breeding values of other 'evaluation' individuals. Simulation studies have shown that these predictions of breeding values can be accurate, when training and evaluation individuals are (closely) related. However, many general applications of genomic selection require the prediction of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals, i.e. individuals from the same population, but not particularly closely related to the training individuals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Accuracy of selection was investigated by computer simulation of small populations. Using scaling arguments, the results were extended to different populations, training data sets and genome sizes, and different trait heritabilities.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Prediction of breeding values of unrelated individuals required a substantially higher marker density and number of training records than when prediction individuals were offspring of training individuals. However, when the number of records was 2*N_e*L and the number of markers was 10*N_e*L, the breeding values of unrelated individuals could be predicted with accuracies of 0.88 – 0.93, where N_eis the effective population size and L the genome size in Morgan. Reducing this requirement to 1*N_e*L individuals, reduced prediction accuracies to 0.73–0.83.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>For livestock populations, 1N_eL requires about ~30,000 training records, but this may be reduced if training and evaluation animals are related. A prediction equation is presented, that predicts accuracy when training and evaluation individuals are related. For humans, 1N_eL requires ~350,000 individuals, which means that human disease risk prediction is possible only for diseases that are determined by a limited number of genes. Otherwise, genotyping and phenotypic recording need to become very common in the future.</p

The contribution of genetic variants to disease depends on the ruler

Our understanding of the genetic basis of disease has evolved from descriptions of overall heritability or familiality to the identification of large numbers of risk loci. One can quantify the impact of such loci on disease using a plethora of measures, which can guide future research decisions. However, different measures can attribute varying degrees of importance to a variant. In this Analysis, we consider and contrast the most commonly used measures-specifically, the heritability of disease liability, approximate heritability, sibling recurrence risk, overall genetic variance using a logarithmic relative risk scale, the area under the receiver-operating curve for risk prediction and the population attributable fraction-and give guidelines for their use that should be explicitly considered when assessing the contribution of genetic variants to disease

A Unifying Framework for Evaluating the Predictive Power of Genetic Variants Based on the Level of Heritability Explained

An increasing number of genetic variants have been identified for many complex diseases. However, it is controversial whether risk prediction based on genomic profiles will be useful clinically. Appropriate statistical measures to evaluate the performance of genetic risk prediction models are required. Previous studies have mainly focused on the use of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, or AUC, to judge the predictive value of genetic tests. However, AUC has its limitations and should be complemented by other measures. In this study, we develop a novel unifying statistical framework that connects a large variety of predictive indices together. We showed that, given the overall disease probability and the level of variance in total liability (or heritability) explained by the genetic variants, we can estimate analytically a large variety of prediction metrics, for example the AUC, the mean risk difference between cases and non-cases, the net reclassification improvement (ability to reclassify people into high- and low-risk categories), the proportion of cases explained by a specific percentile of population at the highest risk, the variance of predicted risks, and the risk at any percentile. We also demonstrate how to construct graphs to visualize the performance of risk models, such as the ROC curve, the density of risks, and the predictiveness curve (disease risk plotted against risk percentile). The results from simulations match very well with our theoretical estimates. Finally we apply the methodology to nine complex diseases, evaluating the predictive power of genetic tests based on known susceptibility variants for each trait

Common SNPs explain some of the variation in the personality dimensions of neuroticism and extraversion

The personality traits of neuroticism and extraversion are predictive of a number of social and behavioural outcomes and psychiatric disorders. Twin and family studies have reported moderate heritability estimates for both traits. Few associations have been reported between genetic variants and neuroticism/extraversion, but hardly any have been replicated. Moreover, the ones that have been replicated explain only a small proportion of the heritability (<∼2%). Using genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data from ∼12 000 unrelated individuals we estimated the proportion of phenotypic variance explained by variants in linkage disequilibrium with common SNPs as 0.06 (s.e.=0.03) for neuroticism and 0.12 (s.e.=0.03) for extraversion. In an additional series of analyses in a family-based sample, we show that while for both traits ∼45% of the phenotypic variance can be explained by pedigree data (that is, expected genetic similarity) one third of this can be explained by SNP data (that is, realized genetic similarity). A part of the so-called ‘missing heritability' has now been accounted for, but some of the reported heritability is still unexplained. Possible explanations for the remaining missing heritability are that: (i) rare variants that are not captured by common SNPs on current genotype platforms make a major contribution; and/ or (ii) the estimates of narrow sense heritability from twin and family studies are biased upwards, for example, by not properly accounting for nonadditive genetic factors and/or (common) environmental factors

Novel genetic analysis for case-control genome-wide association studies: quantification of power and genomic prediction accuracy

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are routinely conducted for both quantitative and binary (disease) traits. We present two analytical tools for use in the experimental design of GWAS. Firstly, we present power calculations quantifying power in a unified framework for a range of scenarios. In this context we consider the utility of quantitative scores (e.g. endophenotypes) that may be available on cases only or both cases and controls. Secondly, we consider, the accuracy of prediction of genetic risk from genome-wide SNPs and derive an expression for genomic prediction accuracy using a liability threshold model for disease traits in a case-control design. The expected values based on our derived equations for both power and prediction accuracy agree well with observed estimates from simulations

Presymptomatic risk assessment for chronic non-communicable diseases

The prevalence of common chronic non-communicable diseases (CNCDs) far overshadows the prevalence of both monogenic and infectious diseases combined. All CNCDs, also called complex genetic diseases, have a heritable genetic component that can be used for pre-symptomatic risk assessment. Common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that tag risk haplotypes across the genome currently account for a non-trivial portion of the germ-line genetic risk and we will likely continue to identify the remaining missing heritability in the form of rare variants, copy number variants and epigenetic modifications. Here, we describe a novel measure for calculating the lifetime risk of a disease, called the genetic composite index (GCI), and demonstrate its predictive value as a clinical classifier. The GCI only considers summary statistics of the effects of genetic variation and hence does not require the results of large-scale studies simultaneously assessing multiple risk factors. Combining GCI scores with environmental risk information provides an additional tool for clinical decision-making. The GCI can be populated with heritable risk information of any type, and thus represents a framework for CNCD pre-symptomatic risk assessment that can be populated as additional risk information is identified through next-generation technologies.Comment: Plos ONE paper. Previous version was withdrawn to be updated by the journal's pdf versio