• Animal Bioscience
• /
• v.36 no.9
• /
• 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.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• v.27 no.11
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Animal Reproduction and Biotechnology
• /
• v.38 no.1
• /
• pp.32-37
• /
• 2023

This study has evaluated the genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) of the commercial Hanwoo population using the genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) method and genomic information. Furthermore, it analyzed the accuracy and realized accuracy of the GEBV. 1,740 heads of the Hanwoo population which were analyzed using a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) Chip has selected as the test population. For carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), back fat thickness (BFT), and marbling score (MS), the mean GEBVs estimated using the GBLUP method were 3.819, 0.740, -0.248, and 0.041, respectively and the accuracy of each trait was 0.743, 0.728, 0.737, and 0.765, respectively. The accuracy of the breeding value was affected by heritability. The accuracy was estimated to be low in EMA with low heritability and high in MS with high heritability. Realized accuracy values of 0.522, 0.404, 0.444, and 0.539 for CWT, EMA, BFT, and MS, respectively, showing the same pattern as the accuracy value. The results of this study suggest that the breeding value of each individual can be estimated with higher accuracy by estimating the GEBV using the genomic information of 18,499 reference populations. If this method is used and applied to individual selection in a commercial Hanwoo population, more precise and economical individual selection is possible. In addition, continuous verification of the GBLUP model and establishment of a reference population suitable for commercial Hanwoo populations in Korea will enable a more accurate evaluation of individuals.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.159-169
• /
• 2019

Objective: Models for genomic selection assume that the reference population is an unselected population. However, in practice, genotyped individuals, such as progeny-tested bulls, are highly selected, and the reference population is created after preselection. In dairy cattle, the intensity of selection is higher in males than in females, suggesting that cows can be added to the reference population with less bias and loss of accuracy. The objective is to develop formulas applied to any genomic prediction studies or practice with preselected animals as reference population. Methods: We developed formulas for calculating the reliability and bias of genomically enhanced breeding values (GEBV) in the reference population where individuals are preselected on estimated breeding values. Based on the formulas presented, deterministic simulation was conducted by varying heritability, preselection percentage, and the reference population size. Results: The number of bulls equal to a cow regarding the reliability of GEBV was expressed through a simple formula for the reference population consisting of preselected animals. The bull population was vastly superior to the cow population regarding the reliability of GEBV for low-heritability traits. However, the superiority of reliability from the bull reference population over the cow population decreased as heritability increased. Bias was greater for bulls than cows. Bias and reduction in reliability of GEBV due to preselection was alleviated by expanding reference population. Conclusion: Cows are easier in expanding reference population size compared with bulls and alleviate bias and reduction in reliability of GEBV of bulls which are highly preselected than cows by expanding the cow reference population.

• Journal of Animal Science and Technology
• /
• v.65 no.4
• /
• pp.720-734
• /
• 2023

In Korea, Korea Proven Bulls (KPN) program has been well-developed. Breeding and evaluation of cows are also an essential factor to increase earnings and genetic gain. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of cow breeding value by using three methods (pedigree index [PI], pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction [PBLUP], and genomic-BLUP [GBLUP]). The reference population (n = 16,971) was used to estimate breeding values for 481 females as a test population. The accuracy of GBLUP was 0.63, 0.66, 0.62 and 0.63 for carcass weight (CWT), eye muscle area (EMA), back-fat thickness (BFT), and marbling score (MS), respectively. As for the PBLUP method, accuracy of prediction was 0.43 for CWT, 0.45 for EMA, 0.43 for MS, and 0.44 for BFT. Accuracy of PI method was the lowest (0.28 to 0.29 for carcass traits). The increase by approximate 20% in accuracy of GBLUP method than other methods could be because genomic information may explain Mendelian sampling error that pedigree information cannot detect. Bias can cause reducing accuracy of estimated breeding value (EBV) for selected animals. Regression coefficient between true breeding value (TBV) and GBLUP EBV, PBLUP EBV, and PI EBV were 0.78, 0.625, and 0.35, respectively for CWT. This showed that genomic EBV (GEBV) is less biased than PBLUP and PI EBV in this study. In addition, number of effective chromosome segments (M_e) statistic that indicates the independent loci is one of the important factors affecting the accuracy of BLUP. The correlation between M_e and the accuracy of GBLUP is related to the genetic relationship between reference and test population. The correlations between M_e and accuracy were -0.74 in CWT, -0.75 in EMA, -0.73 in MS, and -0.75 in BF, which were strongly negative. These results proved that the estimation of genetic ability using genomic data is the most effective, and the smaller the M_e, the higher the accuracy of EBV.

• Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences
• /
• v.28 no.11
• /
• pp.1551-1557
• /
• 2015

The missing heritability has been a major problem in the analysis of best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP). We introduced the traditional genome-wide association study (GWAS) into the BLUP to improve the heritability estimation. We analyzed eight pork quality traits of the Berkshire breeds using GWAS and BLUP. GWAS detects the putative quantitative trait loci regions given traits. The single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were obtained using GWAS results with p value <0.01. BLUP analyzed with significant SNPs was much more accurate than that with total genotyped SNPs in terms of narrow-sense heritability. It implies that genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) of pork quality traits can be calculated by BLUP via GWAS. The GWAS model was the linear regression using PLINK and BLUP model was the G-BLUP and SNP-GBLUP. The SNP-GBLUP uses SNP-SNP relationship matrix. The BLUP analysis using preprocessing of GWAS can be one of the possible alternatives of solving the missing heritability problem and it can provide alternative BLUP method which can find more accurate GEBVs.

• Journal of Animal Science and Technology
• /
• v.53 no.1
• /
• pp.1-6
• /
• 2011

This simulation study was performed to investigate the accuracy of the estimated breeding value by using genomic information (GEBV) by way of Bayesian framework. Genomic information by way of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) from a chromosome with length of 100cM were simulated with different marker distance (0.1cM, 0.5cM), heritabilities (0.1, 0.5) and half sibs families (20 heads, 4 heads). For generating the simulated population in which animals were inferred to genomic polymorphism, we assumed that the number of quantitative trait loci (QTL) were equal with the number of no effect markers. The positions of markers and QTLs were located with even and scatter distances, respectively. The accuracies of estimated breeding values by way of indicating correlations between true and estimated breeding values were compared on several cases of marker distances, heritabilities and family sizes. The accuracies of breeding values on animals only having genomic information were 0.87 and 0.81 in marker distances of 0.1cM and 0.5cM, respectively. These accuracies were shown to be influenced by heritabilities (0.87 at $h^2$ =0.10, 0.94 at $h^2$ =0.50). According to half sibs' family size, these accuracies were 0.87 and 0.84 in family size of 20 and 4, respectively. As half sibs family size is high, accuracy of breeding appeared high. Based on the results of this study it is concluded that the amount of marker information, heritability and family size would influence the accuracy of the estimated breeding values in genomic selection methodology for animal breeding.