The use of multi-breed reference populations and multi-omic data to maximize accuracy of genomic prediction

Similar documents
The use of multi-breed reference populations and multi-omic data to maximize accuracy of genomic prediction

Traditional Genetic Improvement. Genetic variation is due to differences in DNA sequence. Adding DNA sequence data to traditional breeding.

GenSap Meeting, June 13-14, Aarhus. Genomic Selection with QTL information Didier Boichard

Genomic selection in the Australian sheep industry

Genomic Selection in Dairy Cattle

QTL Mapping, MAS, and Genomic Selection

Genomic Selection in Sheep Breeding Programs

Strategic Research Center. Genomic Selection in Animals and Plants

Genetics Effective Use of New and Existing Methods

Practical integration of genomic selection in dairy cattle breeding schemes

Genome wide association and genomic selection to speed up genetic improvement for meat quality in Hanwoo

The promise of genomics for animal improvement. Daniela Lourenco

Melding genomics and quantitative genetics in sheep breeding programs: opportunities and limits

What could the pig sector learn from the cattle sector. Nordic breeding evaluation in dairy cattle

EAAP : 29/08-02/ A L I M E N T A T I O N A G R I C U L T U R E E N V I R O N N E M E N T

Introduction to Animal Breeding & Genomics

BLUP and Genomic Selection

Genetic evaluation programs and future opportunities

Value of DNA information for beef bull selection

Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Aarhus University, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark. Nordic Cattle Genetic Evaluation, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark

The what, why and how of Genomics for the beef cattle breeder

Obiettivi e recenti acquisizioni del progetto di ricerca SelMol

Genomic prediction for numerically small breeds, using models with pre selected and differentially weighted markers

QTL Mapping, MAS, and Genomic Selection

Revisiting the a posteriori granddaughter design

A journey: opportunities & challenges of melding genomics into U.S. sheep breeding programs

Using RNAseq data to improve genomic selection in dairy cattle

Application of MAS in French dairy cattle. Guillaume F., Fritz S., Boichard D., Druet T.

2/22/2012. Impact of Genomics on Dairy Cattle Breeding. Basics of the DNA molecule. Genomic data revolutionize dairy cattle breeding

Fundamentals of Genomic Selection

Strategy for Applying Genome-Wide Selection in Dairy Cattle

Subproject 1: Dairy cattle

João Dürr Interbull Centre Director. Animal identification and traceability Interbull s s and Interbeef s perspectives

Marker Assisted Selection Where, When, and How. Lecture 18

Whole genome association analysis of resistance / susceptibility to paratuberculosis in French Holstein and Normande cattle Sanchez MP, Guatteo R,

The economics of using DNA markers for bull selection in the beef seedstock sector A.L. Van Eenennaam 1, J.H. van der Werf 2, M.E.

Efficient inversion of genomic relationship matrix and its implications. Ignacy Misztal University of Georgia. Work at UGA

Genomic selection applies to synthetic breeds

Single- step GBLUP using APY inverse for protein yield in US Holstein with a large number of genotyped animals

Estimation of genomic breeding values for the susceptibility to Digital Dermatitis in Holstein dairy cattle using improved methods for phenotyping

The effect of genomic information on optimal contribution selection in livestock breeding programs

A strategy for multiple linkage disequilibrium mapping methods to validate additive QTL. Abstracts

Genomic selection in cattle industry: achievements and impact

Genetic Evaluations. Stephen Scott Canadian Hereford Association

Genomic Selection in Beef Ireland Francis Kearney ICBF

EFFICIENT DESIGNS FOR FINE-MAPPING OF QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCI USING LINKAGE DISEQUILIBRIUM AND LINKAGE

Impact of QTL minor allele frequency on genomic evaluation using real genotype data and simulated phenotypes in Japanese Black cattle

From Genotype to Phenotype

Domestic animal genomes meet animal breeding translational biology in the ag-biotech sector. Jerry Taylor University of Missouri-Columbia

Strategy for applying genome-wide selection in dairy cattle

Challenge Improve livestock productivity

Genomic prediction. Kevin Byskov, Ulrik Sander Nielsen and Gert Pedersen Aamand. Nordisk Avlsværdi Vurdering. Nordic Cattle Genetic Evaluation

Alison Van Eenennaam

Efficient genomic prediction based on whole genome sequence data using split and merge Bayesian variable selection

Nationality Sex Sadegh Alijani 23/07/1971 Iranian M. Married

Implementation of Genomic Selection in Pig Breeding Programs

MAS using a dense SNP markers map: Application to the Normande and Montbéliarde breeds

Do markers add value?

Genomic management of inbreeding in breeding schemes

Genomic predictions using 3K, 50K, 800K or sequence data within and across populations results and speculations

latestdevelopments relevant for the Ag sector André Eggen Agriculture Segment Manager, Europe

Genome selection: Basics and experience in animal systems. Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.

Uses of genomics in livestock agriculture

Genomic Resources and Gene/QTL Discovery in Livestock

Genomic Prediction in Hereford Cattle

Optimizing Traditional and Marker Assisted Evaluation in Beef Cattle

Breeding Programs Review of approaches in Australia

Lecture: Genetic Basis of Complex Phenotypes Advanced Topics in Computa8onal Genomics

Genomic selection and its potential to change cattle breeding

Applied Bioinformatics

The potential of genotyping pooled DNA to leverage commercial phenotypes for genetic improvement of beef cattle

Genomic Postcard from Dairy Cattle Breeding GUDP Project. Søren Borchersen, Head R&D VikingGenetics

THE HEALTH AND RETIREMENT STUDY: GENETIC DATA UPDATE

Published November 25, 2014

Bull Selection Strategies Using Genomic Estimated Breeding Values

Association Mapping in Plants PLSC 731 Plant Molecular Genetics Phil McClean April, 2010

Breeding on polled genetics in Holsteins - chances and limitations

Across-breed genomic prediction in dairy cattle

Decoding genomic selection and the benefit for unconventional traits

Lecture 23: Causes and Consequences of Linkage Disequilibrium. November 16, 2012

The Accuracy of Genomic Selection in Norwegian Red. Cattle Assessed by Cross Validation

Note. Polymorphic regions affecting human height also control stature in

Using Genomics to Improve the Genetic Potential and Management of Your Herd

Should the Markers on X Chromosome be Used for Genomic Prediction?

Walking the Cattle Continuum: Moving from the BovineSNP50 to Higher and Lower Density SNP Panels

How might DNA-based information generate value in the beef cattle sector?

Developments in the Genetic Improvement of a Large Commercial Population in the New Zealand Sheep Industry

, 2018 (1) AGIL

QTL Mapping Using Multiple Markers Simultaneously

Effects of Marker Density, Number of Quantitative Trait Loci and Heritability of Trait on Genomic Selection Accuracy

RP1: AN EXAMPLE OF REVERSE GENETICS APPROACH TO DESCRIBE COMMON RECESSIVE DEFECTS

Agriculture Victoria, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia. 3

From Genotype to Phenotype

the hapflk method María Inés Fariello, Simon Boitard, Magali San Cristobal, Bertrand Servin INRA, GenPhySE, Toulouse

Applications of Genomics Introduction of genomics selection procedures in existing genetic improvement programmes

Genetic variation and RNA-seq

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D. Cooperative Extension Specialist

Within-breed and multi-breed GWAS on imputed whole-genome sequence variants reveal candidate

Genome-wide association analysis for 305- day milk production traits in dairy cattle

SNPs - GWAS - eqtls. Sebastian Schmeier

Transcription:

The use of multi-breed reference populations and multi-omic data to maximize accuracy of genomic prediction M. E. Goddard 1,2, I.M. MacLeod 2, K.E. Kemper 3, R. Xiang 1, I. Van den Berg 1, M. Khansefid 2, H. D. Daetwyler 2 & B.J. Hayes 4 1 Faculty of Veterinary & Agricultural Science, University of Melbourne, 2 Agriculture Victoria, Bundoora, 3 Institute for Molecular Bioscience, and 4 Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4067, Australia.

This talk Introduction Do QTL segregate across breeds? Why are multi-breed GEBVs hard? Solutions 1

Introduction GEBV accuracy is low if reference population is small, or target populations is distantly related to training population Training populations within breed are too small numerically small breed hard to measure traits eg FCE Therefore, use multi-breed training population Training on a different breed to target low accuracy Aim = Accurate GEBVs for a breed with a small training population based on a multi-breed training population 2

Do QTL segregate across breeds?(kath Kemper) Hol Hol Young QTL Old QTL Hol Hol-Jer

Do QTL segregate across breeds? Across 11 QTL, length of conserved haplotype (0.4kb-55kb) around mutation suggest age of QTL mutations varies ~ 2,000 to 50,000 generations old Prior to breed formation QTL can and do segregate across breeds, although drift and selection can result in fixation

Age of myostatin mutations (50 10 gen) (O Rourke et al)

Why are multi-breed GEBVs hard? SNP x breed interactions differences in LD phase between breeds QTL x breed interactions Due to non-additive gene action typically small variances equivalent to sire x breed interactions typically small Low accuracy even in simulation Differences in allele frequency F ST is low QTL segregate across breeds 6

Why are multi-breed GEBVs hard? LD phase differs between breeds Within breed GEBVs estimate the effect of large chromosome segments This works due to LD within a breed Effective number of chromosome segments = 5000 That is, segments 600 kb long 7

Why are multi-breed GEBVs hard? Within breed GEBVs estimate the effect of large chromosome segments This works due to LD within a breed Effective number of chromosome segments = 5000 That is, segments 600 kb long Across breeds conserved segments are much smaller (x10 smaller) 9

Solutions Increase size of training population Include target breed in training population 10

Aussie Reds Holstein 4000 bulls, 10023 cows Aussie Reds 114 Bulls Jersey 1044 bulls, 4232 cows Real or imputed 630K SNP for all individuals

Accuracy of Bayes R (Irene van den Berg) 12

Solutions Increase size of training population Include target breed in training population Use denser SNP panels or sequence 13

~40,000 Variance explained by SNPs and sequence (Iona Macleod) ~600,000 ~1 million ~40,000 ~600,000 ~1 million ~10,000 ~40,000 ~400,000 ~600,000 ~1 million ~10,000 ~40,000 ~400,000 ~600,000 ~1 million Proportion of Total Genetic Variance Explained by SNP and Pedigree: BayesR (Mixed Hol & Jer) % Genetic Var - SNP % Genetic Var - Ped 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 50K 800K SEQ 50K 800K SEQ 10K 50K800Kpruned800K SEQ 10K 50K800Kpruned800K SEQ Temperament Stature Milk Yield Protein Yield Aust Bull & Cow: Holstein & Jersey Danz Bulls Only: Holstein & Jersey 14

Harnessing the power of whole-genome sequence: first global report of improved genomic prediction accuracy using sequence data in sheep Iona MacLeod, Bolormaa Sunduimijid, Majid Khansefid, Andrew Swan, Julius van der Werf & Hans Daetwyler

Number of Animals Number of Animals Composition of animals in Genomic Prediction Reference Set TRAITS Validation sets - low relationships with Ref.: 1. Merino 2. Merino x Border Leicester F1 Composition of animals in Discovery GWAS Set TRAITS

-log(p-value) GWAS Carcass Fat Depth (ccfat)

Prediction Accuracy Meat Traits: GBLUP Accuracy - Merino x Border Leicester 0.6 0.5 50K 50K+Top Seq (2) 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 ccfat cemd imf pemd sf5 pwt

Solutions Increase size of training population Include target breed in training population Use denser SNP panels or sequence Use Bayesian statistical method not GBLUP 19

Accuracy r(dgv,dtd) in Aussie Red Bulls (Iona MacLeod)

Prediction Accuracy Wool Traits: Prediction Accuracy in Merinos 0.5 50K BayesR 50K+Top Seq BayesRC 50K+Top Seq 0.4 0.3 50K 50K 0.2 50K 0.1 0.0 Breech Wrinkle Clean Fleece Wt Fibre Diameter TRAIT

SNP effect SNP effect BayesR vs BLUP (BTA11) O = BayesR O = GBLUP Chromosome Position (Mb)

Solutions Increase size of training population Include target breed in training population Use denser SNP panels or sequence Use Bayesian statistical method not GBLUP Use multiple traits 23

Multi-trait GWAS (Ruidong Xiang) Previously reported calving difficulty locus (Purfield et al 2015)

Validation of lead pleiotropic SNPs (Ruidong Xiang) Select 21 lead pleiotropic SNPs and confirmed by conditional analysis in bulls Linear index validation of lead pleiotropic SNPs in cows: Phenotype SNPs no. SNP no. with the same effect directions Percent SNPs no. P<0.05 in validation GWAS Percen t RT 21 100% 17 81% PC 21 21 100% 18 86% CT 21 100% 17 81%

The effects of lead SNPs across independent traits Cluster of SNPs Effect of SNPs

Solutions Increase size of training population Include target breed in training population Use denser SNP panels or sequence Use Bayesian statistical method not GBLUP Use multiple traits Use gene expression 27

Number of cis eqtl in cattle (Ben Hayes) Milk Blood -log10pvalue Significant FDR Significant SNP FDR SNP 1 10,019,870 0.958 10,061,484 0.826 2 1,150,197 0.835 1,637,047 0.507 3 173,662 0.553 422,948 0.196 4 40,601 0.237 176,161 0.047 5 15,299 0.063 98,340 0.008 6 6,831 0.014 60,538 0.001 7 3,340 0.003 38,413 0.000 8 2,201 0.000 26,655 0.000

eqtl and QTL (meat quality) comparison within 50kb of calpastatin (Majid Khansefid)

eqtl and QTL (meat quality, PW hip height and multi-trait) overlap

Effect P-value Prop. σ 2 P Additional traits phosphorus conc. 41.8 1.10x10-11 0.107 eslc37a1 0.160 3.55x10-18 0.224 Key production trait, milk yield milk yield Holstein cows -37.6 2.19x10-3 0.001 milk yield Holstein bulls -40.3 3.17x10-3 0.003 milk yield Jersey cows -45.2 3.26x10-3 0.002 That is the allele that increases expression of SLC27A1 (an antiporter): 1. Increases phosphorus concentration 2. Decreases milk yield (Kemper et al)

Solutions Gene expression data gene cis eqtl splicing cis eqtl exon cis eqtl 32

Phenotypic differences due to splicing Human Tau gene splicing related to the Alzheimer s disease Many genome variants affecting gene splicing, sqtl contribute to human diseases Li et al., 2016 33

Overlap between eqtl and milk QTL (Ruidong Xiang) 34

Example: FUK, chr 18, fat yield (Irene van den Berg) Local GEBV variance Correlation local GEBV & gene expression

Solutions Include target breed in training population Use denser SNP panels or sequence Use Bayesian statistical method not GBLUP Multi-trait analysis e.g. gene expression data Use functional annotation of genome 36

SNP effects at cellular level Quantify the impact of a mutation on gene expression levels Schaub et al 2012 37

Genomic prediction Milk (Iona MacLeod) BayesR Total SNP 0.0 0.0001 0.001 0.01 1 Zero 2 Tiny 3 Small 4 Medium Mixture - 4 Normal Distributions 905,813 99.3% 0.69% 0.004% 0.001% BayesRC 0.0 0.0001 0.001 0.01 SNP Class No. SNP 1 2 3 4 Lact genes + NSC 3768 (0.4%) 95.0% 4.3% 0.58% 0.12% Lact other 57722 (6%) 99.3% 0.7% 0.05% 0.004% 847905 All others (93%) 99.5% 0.5% 0.01% 0.000% Variance explained 11% 12% 77%

Cattle stature (Aniek Bouwman, Ben Hayes et al) Annotation class Number intergenic_variant 83 upstream_gene_variant 11 5_prime_UTR_variant 1 intron_variant 55 missense_variant 5 downstream_gene_variant 8 ChiP-SEQ peaks* 8 WBC eqtl 10

Accuracy only improves a little The bad news You need to capture a high proportion of total variance 40

Conclusion Data from the target breed is the most useful But, training data from other breeds helps Advantage to use sequence data and Bayesian method Sequence imputation loses accuracy Identify near perfect markers and genotype them directly Expression data and functional annotation helps select best variants 41