Genomic Prediction in Maize Breeding Populations with Genotyping-by-Sequencing

Abstract

Genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) technologies have proven capacity for delivering large numbers of marker genotypes with potentially less ascertainment bias than standard single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays. Therefore, GBS has become an attractive alternative technology for genomic selection. However, the use of GBS data poses important challenges, and the accuracy of genomic prediction using GBS is currently undergoing investigation in several crops, including maize, wheat, and cassava. The main objective of this study was to evaluate various methods for incorporating GBS information and compare them with pedigree models for predicting genetic values of lines from two maize populations evaluated for different traits measured in different environments (experiments 1 and 2). Given that GBS data come with a large percentage of uncalled genotypes, we evaluated methods using nonimputed, imputed, and GBS-inferred haplotypes of different lengths (short or long). GBS and pedigree data were incorporated into statistical models using either the genomic best linear unbiased predictors (GBLUP) or the reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces (RKHS) regressions, and prediction accuracy was quantified using cross-validation methods. The following results were found: relative to pedigree or marker-only models, there were consistent gains in prediction accuracy by combining pedigree and GBS data; there was increased predictive ability when using imputed or nonimputed GBS data over inferred haplotype in experiment 1, or nonimputed GBS and information-based imputed short and long haplotypes, as compared to the other methods in experiment 2; the level of prediction accuracy achieved using GBS data in experiment 2 is comparable to those reported by previous authors who analyzed this data set using SNP arrays; and GBLUP and RKHS models with pedigree with nonimputed and imputed GBS data provided the best prediction correlations for the three traits in experiment 1, whereas for experiment 2 RKHS provided slightly better prediction than GBLUP for drought-stressed environments, and both models provided similar predictions in well-watered environments.

Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.

References 37

1. 1.

   Beissinger T. M. Hirsch C. N. Sekhon R. S. Foerster J. M. Johnson J. M., 2013 Marker density and read depth for genotyping populations using genotyping-by-sequencing. Genetics 193: 1073–1081

   Not in our library10.1534/genetics.112.147710

2. 2.

   Bradbury P. J. Zhang Z. Kroon D. E. Casstevens T. M. Ramdoss Y., 2007 TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics 23: 2633–2635

   Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btm308

3. 3.

   Brito F. V. Neto J. B. Sargikzaei M. Cobuci J. A. Schenkel F. S., 2011 Accuracy of genomic selection in simulated populations mimicking the extent of linkage disequilibrium in beef cattle. BMC Genet. 12: 80

   Not in our library10.1186/1471-2156-12-80

4. 4.

   Burgueño J. de los Campos G. Weigel K. A. Crossa J., 2012 Genomic prediction of breeding values when modeling genotype × environment interaction using pedigree and dense molecular markers. Crop Sci. 52: 707–719

   Not in our library

5. 5.

   Chia J.-M. Song C. Bradbury P. J. Costich D. de Leon N., 2012 Maize HapMap2 identifies extant variation from a genome in flux. Nat. Genet. 44: 803–807

   Not in our library10.1038/ng.2313

6. 6.

   Crossa J. de los Campos G. Pérez P. Gianola D. Burgueño J., 2010 Prediction of genetic values of quantitative traits in plant breeding using pedigree and molecular markers. Genetics 186: 713–724

   Not in our library10.1534/genetics.110.118521

7. 7.

   Crossa J. Pérez P. de los Campos G. Mahuku G. Dreisigacker S., 2011 Genomic selection and prediction in plant breeding. J. Crop Improv. 25: 239–261

   Not in our library

8. 8.

   Crossa J. Pérez P. Hickey J. Burgueño J. Ornella L., 2013 Genomic prediction in CIMMYT maize and wheat breeding programs. Heredity doi: 10.1038/hdy.2013.16

   Not in our library10.1038/hdy.2013.16

9. 9.

   de los Campos G. Naya H. Gianola D. Crossa J. Legarra A., 2009 Predicting quantitative traits with regression models for dense molecular markers and pedigrees. Genetics 182: 375–385

   Not in our library10.1534/genetics.109.101501

10. 10.

    de los Campos G. Gianola D. Rosa G. J. M. Weigel K. A. Crossa J., 2010 Semi-parametric genomic-enabled prediction of genetic values using reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces methods. Genet. Res. 92: 295–308

    Not in our library10.1017/s0016672310000285

11. 11.

    de los Campos G. Hickey J. M. Pong-Wong R. Daetwyler H. D. Calus M., 2012 Whole genome regression and prediction methods applied to plant and animal breeding. Genetics 193: 327–345

    Not in our library10.1534/genetics.112.143313

12. 12.
    A Robust, Simple Genotyping-by-Sequencing (GBS) Approach for High Diversity Species · 2011

    No notice
13. 13.

    Fu H. Dooner H. K., 2002 Intraspecific violation of genetic colinearity and its implications in maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99: 9573–9578

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.132259199

14. 14.

    Gianola D. Fernando R. L. Stella A., 2006 Genomic assisted prediction of genetic value with semi-parametric procedures. Genetics 173: 1761–1776

    Not in our library10.1534/genetics.105.049510

15. 15.
    Predicting complex quantitative traits with Bayesian neural networks: a case study with Jersey cows and wheat · 2011

    No notice
16. 16.
    Genome-enabled prediction of genetic values using radial basis function neural networks · 2012

    No notice
17. 17.

    Heslot N. Yang H.-S. Sorells M. E. Jannick J.-L., 2012 Genomic selection in plant breeding: A comparison of models. Crop Sci. 52: 146–160

    Not in our library

18. 18.

    Hickey J. M. Crossa J. Babu R. de los Campos G., 2012 Factors affecting the accuracy of genotype imputation in populations from several maize breeding programs. Crop Sci..

    Not in our library

19. 19.

    Holland T. Down M. Pocock A. Prlić A. Huen D., 2008 BioJava: An open-source framework for bioinformatics, R.C.G. Bioinformatics doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btn397

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btn397

20. 20.

    Janss L. de los Campos G. Sheehan N. Sorensen D., 2012 Inferences from genomic models in stratified populations. Genetics 192: 693–704

    Not in our library10.1534/genetics.112.141143

21. 21.

    Li H. Durbin R., 2009 Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25(14): 1754–1760

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324

22. 22.

    Li H. Handsaker B. Wysoker A. Fennell T. Ruan J., 2009 The sequence alignment/map format and SAM tools. Bioinformatics 25: 2078–2079

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352

23. 23.
    Comparative SNP and haplotype analysis reveals a higher genetic diversity and rapider LD decay in tropical than temperate germplasm in maize. · 2011

    Not checked
24. 24.

    Meuwissen T. H. E. Hayes B. J. Goddard M. E., 2001 Prediction of total genetic values using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157: 1819–1829

    Not in our library10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819

25. 25.

    Pérez P. de los Campos G. Crossa J. Gianola D., 2010 Genomic-enabled prediction based on molecular markers and pedigree using the BLR package in R. The Plant Genome 3: 106–116

    Not in our library10.3835/plantgenome2010.04.0005

26. 26.
    Comparison Between Linear and Non-parametric Regression Models for Genome-Enabled Prediction in Wheat · 2012

    No notice
27. 27.

    Poland J. Endelman J. Dawson J. Rutkoski J. Wu S., 2012 Genomic selection in wheat breeding using genotyping-by-sequencing. The Plant Genome 5: 103–113

    Not in our library

28. 28.

    R Core Team 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at: http://www.R-project.org/

    Not in our library

29. 29.
    Comprehensive genotyping of the USA national maize inbred seed bank · 2013

    No notice
30. 30.
    Maize Inbreds Exhibit High Levels of Copy Number Variation (CNV) and Presence/Absence Variation (PAV) in Genome Content · 2009

    No notice
31. 31.

    VanRaden P., 2007 Genomic measures of relationship and inbreeding. Interbull Bull. 37: 33–36

    Not in our library

32. 32.

    VanRaden P., 2008 Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J. Dairy Sci. 91: 4414–4423

    Not in our library10.3168/jds.2007-0980

33. 33.

    Vazquez A. I. Rosa G. J. M. Weigel K. A. de los Campos G. Gianola D., 2010 Predictive ability of subsets of single nucleotide polymorphisms with and without parent average in US Holsteins. J. Dairy Sci. 93: 5942–5949

    Not in our library10.3168/jds.2010-3335

34. 34.

    Wei Z. Wang W. Hu P. Lyon G. J. Hakonarson H., 2011 SNVer: a statistical tool for variant calling in analysis of pooled or individual next-generation sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 39: e132

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkr599

35. 35.
    Effectiveness of Genomic Prediction of Maize Hybrid Performance in Different Breeding Populations and Environments · 2012

    No notice
36. 36.

    Yan J. Kandianis C. B. Harjes C. E. Bai L. Kim E.-H., 2010 Rare genetic variation at Zea mays crtRB1 increases beta-carotene in maize grain. Nat. Genet. 42: 322–327

    Not in our library10.1038/ng.551

37. 37.

    Zhong S. Dekkers J.C.M. Fernando R.L. Jannink J-L., 2009 Factors affecting accuracy from genomic selection in populations derived from multiple inbred lines: a barley case study. Genetics 182: 355–364

    Not in our library10.1534/genetics.108.098277

Cited by papers we hold 12

• Enhancing Genetic Gain through Genomic Selection: From Livestock to Plants · 2020
  No notice
• Exploring Deep Learning for Complex Trait Genomic Prediction in Polyploid Outcrossing Species · 2020
  No notice
• Genomic Prediction for 25 Agronomic and Quality Traits in Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) · 2018
  Not checked
• Multi-trait, Multi-environment Deep Learning Modeling for Genomic-Enabled Prediction of Plant Traits · 2018
  No notice
• Multi-environment Genomic Prediction of Plant Traits Using Deep Learners With Dense Architecture · 2018
  No notice
• Genotyping‐by‐sequencing approaches to characterize crop genomes: choosing the right tool for the right application · 2017
  No notice
• Effect of Trait Heritability, Training Population Size and Marker Density on Genomic Prediction Accuracy Estimation in 22 bi-parental Tropical Maize Populations · 2017
  No notice
• Genomic Prediction of Gene Bank Wheat Landraces · 2016
  No notice
• Genomic Selection in the Era of Next Generation Sequencing for Complex Traits in Plant Breeding · 2016
  No notice
• Harvesting the Promising Fruits of Genomics: Applying Genome Sequencing Technologies to Crop Breeding · 2014
  No notice
• Kernel-based whole-genome prediction of complex traits: a review · 2014
  No notice
• Genotyping by sequencing for genomic prediction in a soybean breeding population · 2014
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.