中国荷斯坦牛繁殖性状的基因组预测效果比较

doi:10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2022.09.012

Abstract

Abstract: This study aimed to compare different methods for genomic predictions of fertility traits in Chinese Holstein cows, and to select the optimal method and combination of scaling factors (τ and ω) for practical breeding program. The raw fertility data were collected from 33 Holstein dairy farms in Beijing, covering the period from 1998 to 2020. The data included a total of 98 483 to 197 764 phenotypic records for the traits of interval from calving to first service (ICF), number of services for heifers (NSH) and number of services for cows (NSC). Meanwhile, genotypes of 8 718 cows and 3 477 bulls were collected. Both bull validation population and cow validation population were generated based on the structure of populations with genotypes data. Afterwards, best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP), genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) were used for the predictions of the 3 target traits by using AIREMLF90 and BLUPF90 modules in BLUPF90 software. Prediction accuracy and unbiasedness were calculated to evaluate the effect of predictions. The results indicated that all 3 traits had low heritability (0.03-0.08), and weights of each trait information matrix in ssGBLUP methods had impacts on prediction accuracy and unbiasedness. The optimal combination of scaling factors for ICF, NSH and NSC were τ=1.3 and ω=0, τ=0.5 and ω=0.4, and τ=0.5 and ω=0, respectively based on cow validation population, while the combinations were τ=1.5 and ω=0, τ=1.3 and ω=0.8, and τ=0.5 and ω=0, respectively for bull validation population. The accuracy of the ssGBLUP method based on the best weight was 0.10-0.39 and 0.08-0.15 higher than that of the BLUP and GBLUP methods, respectively, and the unbiasedness was closest to 1. In conclusion, ssGBLUP with optimized weights produced the most accurate and unbiased predictions, thus it is suggested to be used in practical genomic selection program for fertility traits of Chinese Holstein cattle.

Key words: dairy cows, fertility traits, genomic selection, accuracy, unbiasedness

CLC Number:

S823.2

SHI Rui, SU Guosheng, CHEN Ziwei, LI Xiang, LUO Hanpeng, LIU Lin, GUO Gang, ZHANG Yi, WANG Yachun, ZHANG Shengli, ZHANG Qin. Comparisons of Genomic Predictions for Fertility Traits in Chinese Holstein Cattle[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2022, 53(9): 2944-2954.

References 38

[1]	SAMARAWEERA A M, VAN DER WERF J H J, BOERNER V, et al.Economic values for production, fertility and mastitis traits for temperate dairy cattle breeds in tropical Sri Lanka[J].J Anim Breed Genet, 2022, 139(3):330-341.
[2]	SCHMIDTMANN C, THALLER G, KARGO M, et al.Derivation of economic values for German dairy breeds by means of a bio-economic model-with special emphasis on functional traits[J].J Dairy Sci, 2021, 104(3):3144-3157.
[3]	LIU A X, LUND M S, WANG Y C, et al.Variance components and correlations of female fertility traits in Chinese Holstein population[J].J Anim Sci Biotechnol, 2017, 8(1):56.
[4]	SUN C, MADSEN P, LUND M S, et al.Improvement in genetic evaluation of female fertility in dairy cattle using multiple-trait models including milk production traits[J].J Anim Sci, 2010, 88(3):871-878.
[5]	VEERKAMP R F, BEERDA B.Genetics and genomics to improve fertility in high producing dairy cows[J].Theriogenology, 2007, 68 Suppl 1:S266-S273.
[6]	MEUWISSEN T H E, HAYES B J, GODDARD M E.Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps[J].Genetics, 2001, 157(4):1819-1829.
[7]	李森, 杜永旺, 文杰, 等.快速型黄羽肉鸡饲料利用效率性状的基因组选择研究[J].畜牧兽医学报, 2021, 52(8):2151-2161.LI S, DU Y W, WEN J, et al.A study of genomic selection for feed efficiency traits in fast-growing yellow-feathered broilers[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2021, 52(8):2151-2161.(in Chinese)
[8]	彭潇, 尹立林, 梅全顺, 等.猪主要经济性状的基因组选择研究[J].畜牧兽医学报, 2019, 50(2):439-445.PENG X, YIN L L, MEI Q S, et al.A study of genome selection based on the porcine major economic traits[J].Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2019, 50(2):439-445.(in Chinese)
[9]	苏丁然, 彭朋, 闫青霞, 等.我国荷斯坦青年公牛基因组选择效果分析[J].畜牧兽医学报, 2021, 52(6):1550-1562.SU D R, PENG P, YAN Q X, et al.Analysis of the effects for genomic selection in Holstein young bulls in China[J].Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2021, 52(6):1550-1562.(in Chinese)
[10]	VANRADEN P M.Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions[J].J Dairy Sci, 2008, 91(11):4414-4423.
[11]	AGUILAR I, MISZTAL I, JOHNSON D L, et al.Hot topic:a unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score[J].J Dairy Sci, 2010, 93(2):743-752.
[12]	MISZTAL I, AGGREY S E, MUIR W M.Experiences with a single-step genome evaluation[J].Poult Sci, 2013, 92(9):2530-2534.
[13]	MISZTAL I, AGUILAR I, LEGARRA A, et al.Choice of parameters for single-step genomic evaluation for type[C]//61 st Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production.2010:357.
[14]	GARCÍA-RUIZ A, COLE J B, VANRADEN P M, et al.Changes in genetic selection differentials and generation intervals in us Holstein dairy cattle as a result of genomic selection[J].Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2016, 113(28):E3995-E4004.
[15]	WIGGANS G R, COLE J B, HUBBARD S M, et al.Genomic selection in dairy cattle:the USDA experience[J].Annu Rev Anim Biosci, 2017, 5(1):309-327.
[16]	NAV (Nordic Cattle Genetic Evaluation).NAV routine genetic evaluation of dairy cattle-Data and genetic models (6th)[EB/OL].(2018-11-06)[2022-02-25].https://www/nordicebv.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2018.11.06-NTM-2018-report-Full.pdf.
[17]	BROWNING B L, ZHOU Y, BROWNING S R.A one-penny imputed genome from next-generation reference panels[J].Am J Hum Genet, 2018, 103(3):338-348.
[18]	CHANG C C, CHOW C C, TELLIER L C, et al.Second-generation PLINK:rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets[J]. GigaScience, 2015, 4:7.
[19]	VANRADEN P M, VAN TASSELL C P, WIGGANS G R, et al.Invited review:reliability of genomic predictions for north American Holstein bulls[J].J Dairy Sci, 2009, 92(1):16-24.
[20]	GUARINI A R, LOURENCO D A L, BRITO L F, et al.Comparison of genomic predictions for lowly heritable traits using multi-step and single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor in Holstein cattle[J].J Dairy Sci, 2018, 101(9):8076-8086.
[21]	MA P, LUND M S, NIELSEN U S, et al.Single-step genomic model improved reliability and reduced the bias of genomic predictions in Danish Jersey[J].J Dairy Sci, 2015, 98(12):9026-9034.
[22]	CHRISTENSEN O F, LUND M S.Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped[J].Genet Sel Evol, 2010, 42(1):2.
[23]	NILFOROOSHAN M A.Application of single-step GBLUP in New Zealand Romney sheep[J].Anim Prod Sci, 2020, 60(9):1136-1144.
[24]	MISZTAL I.Complex models, more data:simpler programming?[J].IEEE Int Comput, 1999, 20:33-42.
[25]	SU G, MA P, NIELSEN U S, et al.Sharing reference data and including cows in the reference population improve genomic predictions in Danish jersey[J].Animal, 2016, 10(6):1067-1075.
[26]	WIGGANS G R, COOPER T A, VANRADEN P M, et al.Technical note:adjustment of traditional cow evaluations to improve accuracy of genomic predictions[J].J Dairy Sci, 2011, 94(12):6188-6193.
[27]	陈紫薇, 师睿, 罗汉鹏, 等.宁夏地区荷斯坦牛青年牛繁殖性状遗传参数估计[J].畜牧兽医学报, 2021, 52(2):344-351.CHEN Z W, SHI R, LUO H P, et al.Estimation of genetic parameters of reproductive traits of Holstein heifers in Ningxia[J].Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2021, 52(2):344-351.(in Chinese)
[28]	SHI R, BRITO L F, LIU A X, et al.Genotype-by-environment interaction in Holstein heifer fertility traits using single-step genomic reaction norm models[J].BMC Genomics, 2021, 22(1):193.
[29]	CHEN Z W, BRITO L F, LUO H P, et al.Genetic and genomic analyses of service sire effect on female reproductive traits in Holstein Cattle[J].Front Genet, 2021, 12:713575.
[30]	CHRISTENSEN O F, MADSEN P, NIELSEN B, et al.Single-step methods for genomic evaluation in pigs[J].Animal, 2012, 6(10):1565-1571.
[31]	ERTL J, EDEL C, EMMERLING R, et al.On the limited increase in validation reliability using high-density genotypes in genomic best linear unbiased prediction:observations from fleckvieh cattle[J].J Dairy Sci, 2014, 97(1):487-496.
[32]	SU G, MADSEN P, NIELSEN U S, et al.Genomic prediction for Nordic red cattle using one-step and selection index blending[J].J Dairy Sci, 2012, 95(2):909-917.
[33]	REZENDE F M, HAILE-MARIAM M, PRYCE J E, et al.Across-country genomic prediction of bull fertility in Jersey dairy cattle[J].J Dairy Sci, 2020, 103(12):11618-11627.
[34]	SONG H, ZHANG J, JIANG Y, et al.Genomic prediction for growth and reproduction traits in pig using an admixed reference population[J].J Anim Sci, 2017, 95(8):3415-3424.
[35]	ALVES A A C, DA COSTA R M, BRESOLIN T, et al.Genome-wide prediction for complex traits under the presence of dominance effects in simulated populations using GBLUP and machine learning methods[J].J Anim Sci, 2020, 98(6):skaa179.
[36]	MOGHADDAR N, VAN DER WERF J H J.Genomic estimation of additive and dominance effects and impact of accounting for dominance on accuracy of genomic evaluation in sheep populations[J].J Anim Breed Genet, 2017, 134(6):453-462.
[37]	GUO X, CHRISTENSEN O F, OSTERSEN T, et al.Improving genetic evaluation of litter size and piglet mortality for both genotyped and nongenotyped individuals using a single-step method[J].J Anim Sci, 2015, 93(2):503-512.
[38]	MANCIN E, TULIOZI B, SARTORI C, et al.Genomic prediction in local breeds:the rendena cattle as a case study[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(6):1815.

Comparisons of Genomic Predictions for Fertility Traits in Chinese Holstein Cattle

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References 38

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	ZHAO Wanli, CAO Qiqi, YANG Yue, DENG Zhaoju, XU Chuang. The Interaction between Gastrointestinal Microbiota and Mucosal Immunity in Health of Perinatal Dairy Cows [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(7): 2751-2760.
[2]	WANG Wannian, CHEN Sijia, GAO Jinrong, WEN Zhonghao, YUAN Mengjiao, ZHANG Hongzhi, PANG Zhixu, QIAO Liying, LIU Wenzhong. Simulation Study on Genomic Selection of Sex-limited Traits Using Multilayer Perceptron in Sheep [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(7): 2824-2835.
[3]	HUANG Shangzhen, MA Longgang, LOU Wenqi, NING Jingyang, ZHANG Hailiang, HU Lirong, ZHA Qiong, LI Bin, XU Qing, BASANG Luobu, WANG Yachun. Analysis of Influencing Factors on Blood Indicators of Dairy Cows at High-altitude Area [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(5): 1964-1978.
[4]	FENG Xiaoyi, YANG Baigao, HAO Haisheng, DU Weihua, ZHU Huabin, CUI Kai, ZHAO Xueming. Mechanism and Solution of Heat Stress Induced Embryo Quality Decline in Dairy Cows [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(3): 868-876.
[5]	PAN Chanyuan, ZHAO Zixuan, DUAN Mingjie, JIANG Linshu, TONG Jinjin. The Mechanism of Artemisia carvifolia Alleviating Dairy Cow Oxidative Stress Predicted by Network Pharmacology [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(3): 1071-1084.
[6]	FAN Lei, SHEN Yu, YOU Liuchao, TIAN Xinyu, LUO Hao, WANG Xin, ZHANG Tingting, SHEN Liuhong. Research Progress on Abnormal Glucose and Lipid Metabolism in Dairy Cows Induced by Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(2): 484-493.
[7]	LI Haodong, MIN Xiangyu, ZHOU Ya, ZHANG Heyang, ZHENG Junjun, LIU Linling, WANG Ping, WANG Yanmei, YANG Fuhe, WANG Guiwu. Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Genomic Selection for Growth-related Traits in Sika Deer (Cervus Nippon) based on GBLUP and other Models [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(2): 608-616.
[8]	YANG Kai, LU Zhuoda, HE Jian, ZHANG Ruiqi, WANG Suqing, LI Kebiao, ZHAO Yunxiang, ZHU Xiaoping, GUO Jinbiao. The Population Effect of Commercial Pigs on the Accuracy of Genomic Selection for Carcass Traits in Duroc Pigs [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(12): 4943-4951.
[9]	SUN Dongxiao, ZHANG Shengli, ZHANG Qin, LI Jiao, ZHANG Guixiang, LIU Chousheng, ZHENG Weijie. Application Progress on Genomic Selection Technology for Dairy Cattle in China [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(10): 4028-4039.
[10]	MA Haoran, ZHANG Lupei, JIN Shengyun, BAO Jinshan, LI Hongyan, GAO Huijiang, XU Lingyang, WANG Zezhao, LI Junya. Assessment of the Genomic Relationships for Chinese Indigenous Beef Cattle Using High-density SNP Chip [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2023, 54(10): 4174-4185.
[11]	PANG Zhixu, ZHANG Hongzhi, QIAO Liying, WANG Wannian, PAN Yangyang, LIU Wenzhong. Simulation Study on Joint Genomic Breeding Using Metafounders [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2022, 53(7): 2172-2181.
[12]	DING Jiqiang, LI Qinghe, ZHANG Gaomeng, LI Sen, ZHENG Maiqing, WEN Jie, ZHAO Guiping. Comparing the Accuracy of Estimated Breeding Value by Several Algorithms on Laying Traits in Broilers [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2022, 53(5): 1364-1372.
[13]	DOU Mengying, ZHANG Cai, LI Yuanxiao, SHAO Qi, ZHU Jiali, LI Wang, CAO Zhijun. Effects of L-Arginine on Proliferation and Apoptosis of Primary Intestinal Epithelial Cells of Dairy Cows Treated with Heat Stress in vitro [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2022, 53(2): 493-504.
[14]	DU Yongwang, HUANG Chao, WANG Yidong, LI Sen, WEN Jie, CHEN Zhiwu, ZHAO Guiping, ZHENG Maiqing. Genomic Selection for RFI in Broiler Combining GWAS Prior Marker Information [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2022, 53(10): 3403-3411.
[15]	ZHANG Pengfei, HE Jun, WANG Lixian, ZHAO Fuping. Simulation Study on the Effects of Different Mating Schemes Based on Genomic and Pedigree Information [J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2022, 53(10): 3448-3458.