G3 Genes Genomes GeneticsGenomicsPeer-reviewed journal article
The accuracy and bias of single-step genomic prediction for populationsunder selection
Abstract
In single-step analyses, missing genotypes are explicitly or implicitly imputed, and this requires centering the observed genotypes, ideally using the mean of the unselected founders. If genotypes are only available on selected individuals, centering on the unselected founder mean is impossible. Here, computer simulation is used to study an alternative analysis that does not require centering genotypes but fits the mean {micro}g of unselected individuals as a fixed effect. To improve numerical properties of the analysis, centering the entire matrix of observed and imputed genotypes, using their sample means can be done in addition to fitting {micro}g. Starting with observed diplotypes from 721 cattle, a 5 generation population was simulated with sire selection to produce 40,000 individuals with phenotypes of which the 1,000 sires had genotypes. The next generation of 8,000 genotyped individuals was used for validation. Evaluations were undertaken: with (J) or without (N) {micro}g when marker covariates were not centered; and with (JC) or without (C) {micro}g when all marker covariates were centered. A pedigree based evaluation was less accurate than genomic analyses. Centering did not influence accuracy of genomic prediction, but fitting {micro}g did. Accuracies were improved when the panel comprised only QTL, models JC and J had accuracies of 99.2%; and models C and N had accuracies of 85.6%. When only markers were in the panel, the 4 models had accuracies of 63.9%. In panels that included causal variants, fitting {micro}g in the model improved accuracy, but had little impact when the panel contained only markers.
- assay: whole-genome sequencing
- research focus: variant calling
- research focus: genome assembly
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: statistical model
- approach: simulation
- Citations
- 48
- FWCI
- 2.53
- Field percentile
- top 10%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Effect of selection on bias and accuracy in genomic prediction of breeding values
Gopal Ramdasji Gowane, Sang Lee, … Julius H. J. van der Werf·bioRxiv·Apr 9, 2018
- Using feedback in pooled experiments augmented with imputation for high genotyping accuracy at reduced cost
Camille Clouard, Carl Nettelblad·G3 Genes Genomes GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Jan 23, 2025
- Genomic prediction using individual-level data and summary statistics from multiple populations
Jérémie Vandenplas, M.P.L. Calus, Gregor Gorjanc·GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Jul 18, 2018
- Using Bayesian multilevel whole-genome regression models for partial pooling of estimation sets in genomic prediction
Frank Technow, L. Radu Totir·bioRxiv·Dec 19, 2014
- Modeling missing parents in single-step test-day SNP-BLUP evaluation of dairy cattle
Dawid Słomian, Kacper Żukowski, … Joanna Szyda·World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production (WCGALP)Peer-reviewed·Feb 26, 2026
- Assessing the response to genomic selection by simulation
Harimurti Buntaran, Angela-Maria Bernal-Vasquez, … Hans‐Peter Piepho·Theoretical and Applied GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Jul 13, 2022