• Animal Bioscience
• /
• 제36권7호
• /
• pp.1003-1009
• /
• 2023

Objective: The objective was to compare (pedigree-based) best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP), genomic BLUP (GBLUP), and single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) methods for genomic evaluation of growth traits in a Mexican Braunvieh cattle population. Methods: Birth (BW), weaning (WW), and yearling weight (YW) data of a Mexican Braunvieh cattle population were analyzed with BLUP, GBLUP, and ssGBLUP methods. These methods are differentiated by the additive genetic relationship matrix included in the model and the animals under evaluation. The predictive ability of the model was evaluated using random partitions of the data in training and testing sets, consistently predicting about 20% of genotyped animals on all occasions. For each partition, the Pearson correlation coefficient between adjusted phenotypes for fixed effects and non-genetic random effects and the estimated breeding values (EBV) were computed. Results: The random contemporary group (CG) effect explained about 50%, 45%, and 35% of the phenotypic variance in BW, WW, and YW, respectively. For the three methods, the CG effect explained the highest proportion of the phenotypic variances (except for YW-GBLUP). The heritability estimate obtained with GBLUP was the lowest for BW, while the highest heritability was obtained with BLUP. For WW, the highest heritability estimate was obtained with BLUP, the estimates obtained with GBLUP and ssGBLUP were similar. For YW, the heritability estimates obtained with GBLUP and BLUP were similar, and the lowest heritability was obtained with ssGBLUP. Pearson correlation coefficients between adjusted phenotypes for non-genetic effects and EBVs were the highest for BLUP, followed by ssBLUP and GBLUP. Conclusion: The successful implementation of genetic evaluations that include genotyped and non-genotyped animals in our study indicate a promising method for use in genetic improvement programs of Braunvieh cattle. Our findings showed that simultaneous evaluation of genotyped and non-genotyped animals improved prediction accuracy for growth traits even with a limited number of genotyped animals.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• 제33권12호
• /
• pp.1912-1921
• /
• 2020

Objective: This study assessed genomic prediction accuracies based on different selection methods, evaluation procedures, training population (TP) sizes, heritability (h²) levels, marker densities and pedigree error (PE) rates in a simulated Korean beef cattle population. Methods: A simulation was performed using two different selection methods, phenotypic and estimated breeding value (EBV), with an h² of 0.1, 0.3, or 0.5 and marker densities of 10, 50, or 777K. A total of 275 males and 2,475 females were randomly selected from the last generation to simulate ten recent generations. The simulation of the PE dataset was modified using only the EBV method of selection with a marker density of 50K and a heritability of 0.3. The proportions of errors substituted were 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40%, respectively. Genetic evaluations were performed using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) with different weighted values. The accuracies of the predictions were determined. Results: Compared with phenotypic selection, the results revealed that the prediction accuracies obtained using GBLUP and ssGBLUP increased across heritability levels and TP sizes during EBV selection. However, an increase in the marker density did not yield higher accuracy in either method except when the h² was 0.3 under the EBV selection method. Based on EBV selection with a heritability of 0.1 and a marker density of 10K, GBLUP and ssGBLUP_0.95 prediction accuracy was higher than that obtained by phenotypic selection. The prediction accuracies from ssGBLUP_0.95 outperformed those from the GBLUP method across all scenarios. When errors were introduced into the pedigree dataset, the prediction accuracies were only minimally influenced across all scenarios. Conclusion: Our study suggests that the use of ssGBLUP_0.95, EBV selection, and low marker density could help improve genetic gains in beef cattle.

• 생명과학회지
• /
• 제32권4호
• /
• pp.279-284
• /
• 2022

본 연구는 일반농가에서 적용 가능한 유전평가시스템을 구축을 위해 경기 지역에서 사육중인 암소 619두를 BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction)과 GBLUP (Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Prediction)을 사용하여 각 형질(도체중, 등심단면적, 등지방두께, 근내지방도) 별 추정 육종가의 정확도를 비교분석 하였다. GBLUP의 경우 참조집단의 크기를 다르게 그룹을 나누어 분석하였다. 분석결과 GBLUP 참조집단의 크기가 커질수록 각 형질의 육종가의 정확도도 상승하는 것을 확인 하였다. BLUP과 GBLUP 방법을 사용하여 추정한 육종가의 정확도를 비교하면, GBLUP 방법을 사용하여 육종가를 추정하였을 때 도체중, 등심단면적, 등지방두께 근내지방도순으로 각각 0.10, 0.09, 0.09, 0.11 이상 상승한 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 따라서, GBLUP 방법을 암소 평가 및 선발에 적용한다면, 정밀하고 정확한 개체 선발이 가능하고 참조집단의 크기를 더욱 키운다면 보다 정확한 개체 선발을 할 수 있기 때문에 선발의 효율성이 증가할 것으로 사료된다.

• Animal Bioscience
• /
• 제36권9호
• /
• pp.1327-1335
• /
• 2023

Objective: When evaluating individuals with the same parent and no phenotype by pedigree best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP), it is difficult to explain carcass grade difference and select individuals because they have the same value in pedigree BLUP (PBLUP). However, single step GBLUP (ssGBLUP), which can estimate the breeding value suitable for the individual by adding genotype, is more accurate than the existing method. Methods: The breeding value and accuracy were estimated with pedigree BLUP and ssGBLUP using pedigree and genotype of 408 Hanwoo cattle from 16 families with the same parent among siblings produced by fertilized egg transplantation. A total of 14,225 Hanwoo cattle with pedigree, genotype and phenotype were used as the reference population. PBLUP obtained estimated breeding value (EBV) using the pedigree of the test and reference populations, and ssGBLUP obtained genomic EBV (GEBV) after constructing and H-matrix by integrating the pedigree and genotype of the test and reference populations. Results: For all traits, the accuracy of GEBV using ssGBLUP is 0.18 to 0.20 higher than the accuracy of EBV obtained with PBLUP. Comparison of EBV and GEBV of individuals without phenotype, since the value of EBV is estimated based on expected values of alleles passed down from common ancestors. It does not take Mendelian sampling into consideration, so the EBV of all individuals within the same family is estimated to be the same value. However, GEBV makes estimating true kinship coefficient based on different genotypes of individuals possible, so GEBV that corresponds to each individual is estimated rather than a uniform GEBV for each individual. Conclusion: Since Hanwoo cows bred through embryo transfer have a high possibility of having the same parent, if ssGBLUP after adding genotype is used, estimating true kinship coefficient corresponding to each individual becomes possible, allowing for more accurate estimation of breeding value.

• 한국동물생명공학회지
• /
• 제38권4호
• /
• pp.268-274
• /
• 2023

Background: Recently, the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) method, which incorporates not only genomic information but also phenotypic information of pedigree, is under study. In this study, we performed a ssGBLUP analysis on a commercial Hanwoo population using phenotypic, genotypic, and pedigree data. Methods: The test population comprised Hanwoo 1,740 heads raised in four regions of Korea, while the reference population used Hanwoo 18,499 heads raised across the country and two-generation pedigree data. Analysis was performed using genotype data generated by the Hanwoo 50 K SNP beadchip. Results: The mean Genome estimated breeding values (GEBVs) estimated using the ssGBLUP methods for carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), back fat thickness (BFT), and marbling score (MS) were 7.348, 1.515, -0.355, and 0.040, respectively, while the accuracy of each trait was 0.749, 0.733, 0.769, and 0.768, respectively. When the correlation analysis between the GEBVs as a result of this study and the actual slaughter performance was confirmed, CWT, EMA, BFT, and MS were reported to be 0.519, 0.435, 0.444, and 0.543, respectively. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the ssGBLUP method enables a more accurate evaluation because it conducts a genetic evaluation of an individual using not only genotype information but also phenotypic information of the pedigree. Individual evaluation using the ssGBLUP method is considered effective for enhancing the genetic ability of farms and enabling accurate and rapid improvements. It is considered that if more pedigree information of reference population is collected for analysis, genetic ability can be evaluated more accurately.

• Genomics & Informatics
• /
• 제12권4호
• /
• pp.254-260
• /
• 2014

Best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) has been used to estimate the fixed effects and random effects of complex traits. Traditionally, genomic relationship matrix-based (GRM) and random marker-based BLUP analyses are prevalent to estimate the genetic values of complex traits. We used three methods: GRM-based prediction (G-BLUP), random marker-based prediction using an identity matrix (so-called single-nucleotide polymorphism [SNP]-BLUP), and SNP-SNP variance-covariance matrix (so-called SNP-GBLUP). We used 35,675 SNPs and R package "rrBLUP" for the BLUP analysis. The SNP-SNP relationship matrix was calculated using the GRM and Sherman-Morrison-Woodbury lemma. The SNP-GBLUP result was very similar to G-BLUP in the prediction of genetic values. However, there were many discrepancies between SNP-BLUP and the other two BLUPs. SNP-GBLUP has the merit to be able to predict genetic values through SNP effects.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• 제33권10호
• /
• pp.1544-1557
• /
• 2020

Objective: Genomic selection (GS) is becoming popular in animals' genetic development. We, therefore, investigated the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) as tool for GS, and compared its efficacy with the traditional pedigree BLUP (pedBLUP) method. Methods: A total of 9,952 males born between 1997 and 2018 under Hanwoo proven-bull selection program was studied. We analyzed body weight at 12 months and carcass weight (kg), backfat thickness, eye muscle area, and marbling score traits. About 7,387 bulls were genotyped using Illumina 50K BeadChip Arrays. Multiple-trait animal model analyses were performed using BLUPF90 software programs. Breeding value accuracy was calculated using two methods: i) Pearson's correlation of genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) with EBV of all animals (r_M1) and ii) correlation using inverse of coefficient matrix from the mixed-model equations (r_M2). Then, we compared these accuracies by overall population, info-type (PHEN, phenotyped-only; GEN, genotyped-only; and PH+GEN, phenotyped and genotyped), and bull-types (YBULL, young male calves; CBULL, young candidate bulls; and PBULL, proven bulls). Results: The r_M1 estimates in the study were between 0.90 and 0.96 among five traits. The r_M1 estimates varied slightly by population and info-type, but noticeably by bull-type for traits. Generally average r_M2 estimates were much smaller than r_M1 (pedBLUP, 0.40 to0.44; ssGBLUP, 0.41 to 0.45) at population level. However, r_M2 from both BLUP models varied noticeably across info-types and bull-types. The ssGBLUP estimates of r_M2 in PHEN, GEN, and PH+ GEN ranged between 0.51 and 0.63, 0.66 and 0.70, and 0.68 and 0.73, respectively. In YBULL, CBULL, and PBULL, the r_M2 estimates ranged between 0.54 and 0.57, 0.55 and 0.62, and 0.70 and 0.74, respectively. The pedBLUP based r_M2 estimates were also relatively lower than ssGBLUP estimates. At the population level, we found an increase in accuracy by 2.0% to 4.5% among traits. Traits in PHEN were least influenced by ssGBLUP (0% to 2.0%), whereas the highest positive changes were in GEN (8.1% to 10.7%). PH+GEN also showed 6.5% to 8.5% increase in accuracy by ssGBLUP. However, the highest improvements were found in bull-types (YBULL, 21% to 35.7%; CBULL, 3.3% to 9.3%; PBULL, 2.8% to 6.1%). Conclusion: A noticeable improvement by ssGBLUP was observed in this study. Findings of differential responses to ssGBLUP by various bulls could assist in better selection decision making as well. We, therefore, suggest that ssGBLUP could be used for GS in Hanwoo proven-bull evaluation program.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• 제32권11호
• /
• pp.1657-1663
• /
• 2019

Objective: A genome-based best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) method was applied to evaluate accuracies of genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) of carcass and reproductive traits in Berkshire, Duroc and Yorkshire populations in Korean swine breeding farms. Methods: The data comprised a total of 1,870, 696, and 1,723 genotyped pigs belonging to Berkshire, Duroc and Yorkshire breeds, respectively. Reference populations for carcass traits consisted of 888 Berkshire, 466 Duroc, and 1,208 Yorkshire pigs, and those for reproductive traits comprised 210, 154, and 890 dams for the respective breeds. The carcass traits analyzed were backfat thickness (BFT) and carcass weight (CWT), and the reproductive traits were total number born (TNB) and number born alive (NBA). For each trait, GEBV accuracies were evaluated with a GEBV BLUP model and realized GEBVs. Results: The accuracies under the GBLUP model for BFT and CWT ranged from 0.33-0.72 and 0.33-0.63, respectively. For NBA and TNB, the model accuracies ranged 0.32 to 0.54 and 0.39 to 0.56, respectively. The realized accuracy estimates for BFT and CWT ranged 0.30 to 0.46 and 0.09 to 0.27, respectively, and 0.50 to 0.70 and 0.70 to 0.87 for NBA and TNB, respectively. For the carcass traits, the GEBV accuracies under the GBLUP model were higher than the realized GEBV accuracies across the breed populations, while for reproductive traits the realized accuracies were higher than the model based GEBV accuracies. Conclusion: The genomic prediction accuracy increased with reference population size and heritability of the trait. The GEBV accuracies were also influenced by GEBV estimation method, such that careful selection of animals based on the estimated GEBVs is needed. GEBV accuracy will increase with a larger sized reference population, which would be more beneficial for traits with low heritability such as reproductive traits.

• 농업과학연구
• /
• 제48권4호
• /
• pp.681-691
• /
• 2021

The estimated breeding value (EBV) and accuracy of Hanwoo steer (Korean cattle) is an indicator that can predict the slaughter time in the future and carcass performance outcomes. Recently, studies using pedigrees and genotypes are being actively conducted to improve the accuracy of the EBV. In this study, the pedigree and genotype of 46 steers obtained from livestock farm A in Gyeongnam were used for a pedigree best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP) and a genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) to estimate and analyze the breeding value and accuracy of the carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), back-fat thickness (BFT), and marbling score (MS). PBLUP estimated the EBV and accuracy by constructing a numeric relationship matrix (NRM) from the 46 steers and reference population I (545,483 heads) with the pedigree and phenotype. GBLUP estimated genomic EBV (GEBV) and accuracy by constructing a genomic relationship matrix (GRM) from the 46 steers and reference population II (16,972 heads) with the genotype and phenotype. As a result, in the order of CWT, EMA, BFT, and MS, the accuracy levels of PBLUP were 0.531, 0.519, 0.524 and 0.530, while the accuracy outcomes of GBLUP were 0.799, 0.779, 0.768, and 0.810. The accuracy estimated by GBLUP was 50.1 - 53.1% higher than that estimated by PBLUP. GEBV estimated with the genotype is expected to show higher accuracy than the EBV calculated using only the pedigree and is thus expected to be used as basic data for genomic selection in the future.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• 제27권11호
• /
• pp.1540-1547
• /
• 2014

The accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) was evaluated for sixteen meat quality traits in a Berkshire population (n = 1,191) that was collected from Dasan breeding farm, Namwon, Korea. The animals were genotyped with the Illumina porcine 62 K single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) bead chips, in which a set of 36,605 SNPs were available after quality control tests. Two methods were applied to evaluate GEBV accuracies, i.e. genome based linear unbiased prediction method (GBLUP) and Bayes B, using ASREML 3.0 and Gensel 4.0 software, respectively. The traits composed different sets of training (both genotypes and phenotypes) and testing (genotypes only) data. Under the GBLUP model, the GEBV accuracies for the training data ranged from $0.42{\pm}0.08$ for collagen to $0.75{\pm}0.02$ for water holding capacity with an average of $0.65{\pm}0.04$ across all the traits. Under the Bayes B model, the GEBV accuracy ranged from $0.10{\pm}0.14$ for National Pork Producers Council (NPCC) marbling score to $0.76{\pm}0.04$ for drip loss, with an average of $0.49{\pm}0.10$. For the testing samples, the GEBV accuracy had an average of $0.46{\pm}0.10$ under the GBLUP model, ranging from $0.20{\pm}0.18$ for protein to $0.65{\pm}0.06$ for drip loss. Under the Bayes B model, the GEBV accuracy ranged from $0.04{\pm}0.09$ for NPCC marbling score to $0.72{\pm}0.05$ for drip loss with an average of $0.38{\pm}0.13$. The GEBV accuracy increased with the size of the training data and heritability. In general, the GEBV accuracies under the Bayes B model were lower than under the GBLUP model, especially when the training sample size was small. Our results suggest that a much greater training sample size is needed to get better GEBV accuracies for the testing samples.