Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>For the XIV QTLMAS workshop, a dataset for traits with complex genetic architecture has been simulated and released for analyses by participants. One of the tasks was to estimate direct genomic values for individuals without phenotyp...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2011-05-01
|
| Series: | BMC Proceedings |
| _version_ | 1811252575751634944 |
|---|---|
| author | Pszczola Marcin Strabel Tomasz Wolc Anna Mucha Sebastian Szydlowski Maciej |
| author_facet | Pszczola Marcin Strabel Tomasz Wolc Anna Mucha Sebastian Szydlowski Maciej |
| author_sort | Pszczola Marcin |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>For the XIV QTLMAS workshop, a dataset for traits with complex genetic architecture has been simulated and released for analyses by participants. One of the tasks was to estimate direct genomic values for individuals without phenotypes. The aim of this paper was to compare results of different approaches used by the participants to calculate direct genomic values for quantitative trait (QT) and binary trait (BT).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Participants applied 26 approaches for QT and 15 approaches for BT. Accuracy for QT was between 0.26 and 0.89 for males and between 0.31 and 0.89 for females, and for BT ranged from 0.27 to 0.85. For QT, percentage of lost response to selection varied from 8% to 83%, whereas for BT the loss was between 15% and 71%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Bayesian model averaging methods predicted breeding values slightly better than GBLUP in a simulated data set. The methods utilizing genomic information performed better than traditional pedigree based BLUP analyses. Bivariate analyses was slightly advantageous over single trait for the same method. None of the methods estimated the non-additivity of QTL affecting the QT, which may be one of the constrains in accuracy observed in real data.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T16:36:49Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9ca15367de0b4ea4b92f0f9e8a1e26bd |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1753-6561 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T16:36:49Z |
| publishDate | 2011-05-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Proceedings |
| spelling | doaj.art-9ca15367de0b4ea4b92f0f9e8a1e26bd2022-12-22T03:24:58ZengBMCBMC Proceedings1753-65612011-05-015Suppl 3S110.1186/1753-6561-5-S3-S1Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selectionPszczola MarcinStrabel TomaszWolc AnnaMucha SebastianSzydlowski Maciej<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>For the XIV QTLMAS workshop, a dataset for traits with complex genetic architecture has been simulated and released for analyses by participants. One of the tasks was to estimate direct genomic values for individuals without phenotypes. The aim of this paper was to compare results of different approaches used by the participants to calculate direct genomic values for quantitative trait (QT) and binary trait (BT).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Participants applied 26 approaches for QT and 15 approaches for BT. Accuracy for QT was between 0.26 and 0.89 for males and between 0.31 and 0.89 for females, and for BT ranged from 0.27 to 0.85. For QT, percentage of lost response to selection varied from 8% to 83%, whereas for BT the loss was between 15% and 71%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Bayesian model averaging methods predicted breeding values slightly better than GBLUP in a simulated data set. The methods utilizing genomic information performed better than traditional pedigree based BLUP analyses. Bivariate analyses was slightly advantageous over single trait for the same method. None of the methods estimated the non-additivity of QTL affecting the QT, which may be one of the constrains in accuracy observed in real data.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Pszczola Marcin Strabel Tomasz Wolc Anna Mucha Sebastian Szydlowski Maciej Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection BMC Proceedings |
| title | Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection |
| title_full | Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection |
| title_short | Comparison of analyses of the QTLMAS XIV common dataset. I: genomic selection |
| title_sort | comparison of analyses of the qtlmas xiv common dataset i genomic selection |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pszczolamarcin comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxivcommondatasetigenomicselection AT strabeltomasz comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxivcommondatasetigenomicselection AT wolcanna comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxivcommondatasetigenomicselection AT muchasebastian comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxivcommondatasetigenomicselection AT szydlowskimaciej comparisonofanalysesoftheqtlmasxivcommondatasetigenomicselection |