Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: AZEVEDO, C. F.
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: RESENDE, M. D. V. de, SILVA, F. F. e, VIANA, J. M. S., VALENTE, M. S. F., RESENDE JUNIOR, M. F. R., MUÑOZ, P.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)
Texto Completo: http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/1022575
Resumo: Background: A complete approach for genome-wide selection (GWS) involves reliable statistical genetics models and methods. Reports on this topic are common for additive genetic models but not for additive-dominance models. The objective of this paper was (i) to compare the performance of 10 additive-dominance predictive models (including current models and proposed modifications), fitted using Bayesian, Lasso and Ridge regression approaches; and (ii) to decompose genomic heritability and accuracy in terms of three quantitative genetic information sources, namely, linkage disequilibrium (LD), co-segregation (CS) and pedigree relationships or family structure (PR). The simulation study considered two broad sense heritability levels (0.30 and 0.50, associated with narrow sense heritabilities of 0.20 and 0.35, respectively) and two genetic architectures for traits (the first consisting of small gene effects and the second consisting of a mixed inheritance model with five major genes). Results: G-REML/G-BLUP and a modified Bayesian/Lasso (called BayesA*B* or t-BLASSO) method performed best in the prediction of genomic breeding as well as the total genotypic values of individuals in all four scenarios (two heritabilities x two genetic architectures). The BayesA*B*-type method showed a better ability to recover the dominance variance/additive variance ratio. Decomposition of genomic heritability and accuracy revealed the following descending importance order of information: LD, CS and PR not captured by markers, the last two being very close. Conclusions: Amongst the 10 models/methods evaluated, the G-BLUP, BAYESA*B* (−2,8) and BAYESA*B* (4,6) methods presented the best results and were found to be adequate for accurately predicting genomic breeding and total genotypic values as well as for estimating additive and dominance in additive-dominance genomic models.
id EMBR_fe74bafc1c9aa30b4a140580a79af009
oai_identifier_str oai:www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br:doc/1022575
network_acronym_str EMBR
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)
repository_id_str 2154
spelling Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.Modelo BayesianoGenética quantitativaMelhoramento genéticoDominance genomic modelsBayesian methodsLasso methodsSelection accuracyParâmetro GenéticoBackground: A complete approach for genome-wide selection (GWS) involves reliable statistical genetics models and methods. Reports on this topic are common for additive genetic models but not for additive-dominance models. The objective of this paper was (i) to compare the performance of 10 additive-dominance predictive models (including current models and proposed modifications), fitted using Bayesian, Lasso and Ridge regression approaches; and (ii) to decompose genomic heritability and accuracy in terms of three quantitative genetic information sources, namely, linkage disequilibrium (LD), co-segregation (CS) and pedigree relationships or family structure (PR). The simulation study considered two broad sense heritability levels (0.30 and 0.50, associated with narrow sense heritabilities of 0.20 and 0.35, respectively) and two genetic architectures for traits (the first consisting of small gene effects and the second consisting of a mixed inheritance model with five major genes). Results: G-REML/G-BLUP and a modified Bayesian/Lasso (called BayesA*B* or t-BLASSO) method performed best in the prediction of genomic breeding as well as the total genotypic values of individuals in all four scenarios (two heritabilities x two genetic architectures). The BayesA*B*-type method showed a better ability to recover the dominance variance/additive variance ratio. Decomposition of genomic heritability and accuracy revealed the following descending importance order of information: LD, CS and PR not captured by markers, the last two being very close. Conclusions: Amongst the 10 models/methods evaluated, the G-BLUP, BAYESA*B* (−2,8) and BAYESA*B* (4,6) methods presented the best results and were found to be adequate for accurately predicting genomic breeding and total genotypic values as well as for estimating additive and dominance in additive-dominance genomic models.Camila Ferreira Azevedo, UFV; MARCOS DEON VILELA DE RESENDE, CNPF; Fabyano Fonseca e Silva, UFV; José Marcelo Soriano Viana, UFV; Magno Sávio Ferreira Valente, UFV; Márcio Fernando Ribeiro Resende Jr, Florida Innovation Hub; Patricio Muñoz, University of Florida.AZEVEDO, C. F.RESENDE, M. D. V. deSILVA, F. F. eVIANA, J. M. S.VALENTE, M. S. F.RESENDE JUNIOR, M. F. R.MUÑOZ, P.2015-08-24T11:11:11Z2015-08-24T11:11:11Z2015-08-2420152016-02-25T11:11:11Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleBMC Genetics, v. 16, art. 105, Aug. 2015. 13 p.http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/102257510.1186/s12863-015-0264-2enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)instacron:EMBRAPA2017-08-16T02:32:11Zoai:www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br:doc/1022575Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/oai/requestopendoar:21542017-08-16T02:32:11falseRepositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/oai/requestcg-riaa@embrapa.bropendoar:21542017-08-16T02:32:11Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
title Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
spellingShingle Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
AZEVEDO, C. F.
Modelo Bayesiano
Genética quantitativa
Melhoramento genético
Dominance genomic models
Bayesian methods
Lasso methods
Selection accuracy
Parâmetro Genético
title_short Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
title_full Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
title_fullStr Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
title_full_unstemmed Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
title_sort Ridge, Lasso and Bayesian additive dominance genomic models.
author AZEVEDO, C. F.
author_facet AZEVEDO, C. F.
RESENDE, M. D. V. de
SILVA, F. F. e
VIANA, J. M. S.
VALENTE, M. S. F.
RESENDE JUNIOR, M. F. R.
MUÑOZ, P.
author_role author
author2 RESENDE, M. D. V. de
SILVA, F. F. e
VIANA, J. M. S.
VALENTE, M. S. F.
RESENDE JUNIOR, M. F. R.
MUÑOZ, P.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Camila Ferreira Azevedo, UFV; MARCOS DEON VILELA DE RESENDE, CNPF; Fabyano Fonseca e Silva, UFV; José Marcelo Soriano Viana, UFV; Magno Sávio Ferreira Valente, UFV; Márcio Fernando Ribeiro Resende Jr, Florida Innovation Hub; Patricio Muñoz, University of Florida.
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv AZEVEDO, C. F.
RESENDE, M. D. V. de
SILVA, F. F. e
VIANA, J. M. S.
VALENTE, M. S. F.
RESENDE JUNIOR, M. F. R.
MUÑOZ, P.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Modelo Bayesiano
Genética quantitativa
Melhoramento genético
Dominance genomic models
Bayesian methods
Lasso methods
Selection accuracy
Parâmetro Genético
topic Modelo Bayesiano
Genética quantitativa
Melhoramento genético
Dominance genomic models
Bayesian methods
Lasso methods
Selection accuracy
Parâmetro Genético
description Background: A complete approach for genome-wide selection (GWS) involves reliable statistical genetics models and methods. Reports on this topic are common for additive genetic models but not for additive-dominance models. The objective of this paper was (i) to compare the performance of 10 additive-dominance predictive models (including current models and proposed modifications), fitted using Bayesian, Lasso and Ridge regression approaches; and (ii) to decompose genomic heritability and accuracy in terms of three quantitative genetic information sources, namely, linkage disequilibrium (LD), co-segregation (CS) and pedigree relationships or family structure (PR). The simulation study considered two broad sense heritability levels (0.30 and 0.50, associated with narrow sense heritabilities of 0.20 and 0.35, respectively) and two genetic architectures for traits (the first consisting of small gene effects and the second consisting of a mixed inheritance model with five major genes). Results: G-REML/G-BLUP and a modified Bayesian/Lasso (called BayesA*B* or t-BLASSO) method performed best in the prediction of genomic breeding as well as the total genotypic values of individuals in all four scenarios (two heritabilities x two genetic architectures). The BayesA*B*-type method showed a better ability to recover the dominance variance/additive variance ratio. Decomposition of genomic heritability and accuracy revealed the following descending importance order of information: LD, CS and PR not captured by markers, the last two being very close. Conclusions: Amongst the 10 models/methods evaluated, the G-BLUP, BAYESA*B* (−2,8) and BAYESA*B* (4,6) methods presented the best results and were found to be adequate for accurately predicting genomic breeding and total genotypic values as well as for estimating additive and dominance in additive-dominance genomic models.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-08-24T11:11:11Z
2015-08-24T11:11:11Z
2015-08-24
2015
2016-02-25T11:11:11Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv BMC Genetics, v. 16, art. 105, Aug. 2015. 13 p.
http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/1022575
10.1186/s12863-015-0264-2
identifier_str_mv BMC Genetics, v. 16, art. 105, Aug. 2015. 13 p.
10.1186/s12863-015-0264-2
url http://www.alice.cnptia.embrapa.br/alice/handle/doc/1022575
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)
instname:Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
instacron:EMBRAPA
instname_str Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
instacron_str EMBRAPA
institution EMBRAPA
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)
collection Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da EMBRAPA (Repository Open Access to Scientific Information from EMBRAPA - Alice) - Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (Embrapa)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv cg-riaa@embrapa.br
_version_ 1794503410220793856