Strategies for genotype imputation in composite beef cattle

BMC Genetics

Danísio P. Munari¹  Luciana C. A. Regitano³  Cintia R. Marcondes³  Fabiana B. Mokry⁶  Marcos Vinicius G. B. da Silva²  Maurício de Alvarenga Mudadu³  Jaqueline O. Rosa¹  Marcos E. Buzanskas¹  Roberto Carvalheiro⁴  Flavio S. Schenkel⁵  Ricardo V. Ventura⁵  Tatiane C. S. Chud¹ 

[1] Departamento de Ciências Exatas, UNESP - Univ Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil;Embrapa Dairy Cattle - Brazilian Corporation of Agricultural Research, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil;Embrapa Southeast Livestock - Brazilian Corporation of Agricultural Research, São Carlos, SP, Brazil;Departamento de Zootecnia, UNESP - Univ Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho”, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil;University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada;Department of Genetics and Evolution, Federal University of São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brazil

关键词: Single nucleotide polymorphism;    Low-density panel;    Genomic data;    Crossbred cattle;    Canchim breed;   

Others  :  1223576
DOI  :  10.1186/s12863-015-0251-7

 received in 2015-03-09, accepted in 2015-07-09,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Genotype imputation has been used to increase genomic information, allow more animals in genome-wide analyses, and reduce genotyping costs. In Brazilian beef cattle production, many animals are resulting from crossbreeding and such an event may alter linkage disequilibrium patterns. Thus, the challenge is to obtain accurately imputed genotypes in crossbred animals. The objective of this study was to evaluate the best fitting and most accurate imputation strategy on the MA genetic group (the progeny of a Charolais sire mated with crossbred Canchim X Zebu cows) and Canchim cattle. The data set contained 400 animals (born between 1999 and 2005) genotyped with the Illumina BovineHD panel. Imputation accuracy of genotypes from the Illumina-Bovine3K (3K), Illumina-BovineLD (6K), GeneSeek-Genomic-Profiler (GGP) BeefLD (GGP9K), GGP-IndicusLD (GGP20Ki), Illumina-BovineSNP50 (50K), GGP-IndicusHD (GGP75Ki), and GGP-BeefHD (GGP80K) to Illumina-BovineHD (HD) SNP panels were investigated. Seven scenarios for reference and target populations were tested; the animals were grouped according with birth year (S1), genetic groups (S2 and S3), genetic groups and birth year (S4 and S5), gender (S6), and gender and birth year (S7). Analyses were performed using FImpute and BEAGLE software and computation run-time was recorded. Genotype imputation accuracy was measured by concordance rate (CR) and allelic R square (R ² ).

Results

The highest imputation accuracy scenario consisted of a reference population with males and females and a target population with young females. Among the SNP panels in the tested scenarios, from the 50K, GGP75Ki and GGP80K were the most adequate to impute to HD in Canchim cattle. FImpute reduced computation run-time to impute genotypes from 20 to 100 times when compared to BEAGLE.

Conclusion

The genotyping panels possessing at least 50 thousands markers are suitable for genotype imputation to HD with acceptable accuracy. The FImpute algorithm demonstrated a higher efficiency of imputed markers, especially in lower density panels. These considerations may assist to increase genotypic information, reduce genotyping costs, and aid in genomic selection evaluations in crossbred animals.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Chud et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Hayes BJ, Bowman PJ, Chamberlain AJ, Goddard ME. Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. J Dairy Sci. 2009; 92:433-443.
• [2]Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics. 2001; 157:1819-1829.
• [3]Hozé C, Fouilloux M-N, Venot E, Guillaume F, Dassonneville R, Fritz S, et al. High-density marker imputation accuracy in sixteen French cattle breeds. Genet Sel Evol. 2013;45:33.
• [4]Moghaddar N, Swan AA, Van der Werf J. Comparing genomic prediction accuracy from purebred, crossbred and combined purebred and crossbred reference populations in sheep. Genet Sel Evol. 2014; 46:58. BioMed Central Full Text
• [5]Kachman SD, Spanger ML, Bennett GL, Hanford KJ, Kuehn LA, Snelling WM, et al. Comparison of molecular breeding values based on within and across-breed training in beef cattle. Genet Sel Evol. 2013;45:30.
• [6]De Roos APW, Hayes BJ, Spelman RJ, Goddard ME. Linkage disequilibrium and persistence of phase in Holstein-Friesian, Jersey and Angus cattle. Genetics. 2008; 179:1503-1512.
• [7]Ma P, Brondum RF, Zhang Q, Lund MS, Su G. Comparison of different methods for imputing genome-wide marker genotypes in Swedish and Finnish Red Cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2013; 96:4666-4677.
• [8]Johnston J, Kistemaker G. Success rate of imputation using different imputation approaches. In : Canadian Dairy Network. 2011. https://www.cdn.ca/Articles/GEBAPR2011/Success%20rate%20of%20imputation%20-%20Jarmila%20Johnston.pdf. Accessed 20 Dec 2014.
• [9]Carvalheiro R, Boison SA, Neves HHR, Sargolzaei M, Schenkel FS, Utsunomiya YT, et al. Accuracy of genotype imputation in Nelore cattle. Genet Sel Evol. 2014;46:69.
• [10]Howie BN, Donnelly P, Marchini J. A flexible and accurate genotype imputation method for the next generation of genome-wide association studies. Plos Genet. 2009; doi:10.1186/gb-2009-10-4-r42
• [11]Hayes BJ, Bowman PJ, Daetwyler HD, Kijas JW, Van der Werf JHJ. Accuracy of genotype imputation in sheep breeds. Anim Genet. 2012; 43:72-80.
• [12]Marchini J, Howie B. Genotype imputation for genome-wide association studies. Nat Rev Genet. 2010; 11:499-511.
• [13]Ventura RV, Lu D, Schenkel FS, Wang Z, Li C, Miller SP. Impact of reference population on accuracy of imputation from 6K to 50K single nucleotide polymorphism chips in purebred and crossbreed beef cattle. J Anim Sci. 2014; 92:1433-1444.
• [14]Boichard D, Chung H, Dassonneville R, David X, Eggen A, Fritz S, et al. Design of a bovine low-density SNP array optimized for imputation. Plos One. 2012; doi:. 10. 1371/journal.pone.0034130 webcite
• [15]Larmer SG, Sargolzaei M, Schenkel FS. Extent of linkage disequilibrium, consistency of gametic phase, and imputation accuracy within and across Canadian dairy breeds. J Dairy Sci. 2014; 97:3128-3141.
• [16]Dassonneville R, Brondum RF, Druet T, Fritz S, Guillaume F, Guldbrandtsen B, et al. Effect of imputing markers from a low-density chip on the reliability of genomic breeding values in Holstein populations. J Dairy Sci. 2011;94:3679–86.
• [17]Pausch H, Aigner B, Emmerling R, Edel C, Götz K-U, Fries R. Imputation of high-density genotypes in the Fleckvieh cattle population. Genet Sel Evol. 2013; 45:3. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Alencar MM. Bovino - Raça Canchim: Origem E Desenvolvimento. Brasília, Embrapa-DMU; 1988.
• [19]Andrade PC, Grossi DA, Paz CCP, Alencar MM, Regitano LCA, Munari DP. Association of an insulin-like growth factor 1 gene microsatellite with phenotypic variation and estimated breeding values of growth traits in Canchim cattle. Anim Genet. 2008; 39:480-485.
• [20]Sargolzaei M, Iwaisaki H, Colleau J. CFC: A Tool for Monitoring Genetic Diversity. 8th World Congress of Genetics Appied to Livestock Production. 2006.27-28.
• [21]Sargolzaei M, Schenkel FS, Jansen GB, Schaeffer LR. Extent of linkage disequilibrium in Holstein cattle in North America. J Dairy Sci. 2008; 91:2106-2017.
• [22]Hill WG, Robertson A. Linkage disequilibrium in finite populations. Theor Appl Genet. 1968; 38:226-231.
• [23]Zimin A V, Delcher AL, Florea L, Kelley DR, Schatz MC, Puiu D, Hanrahan F, Pertea G, Van Tassell CP, Sonstegard TS, Marçais G, Roberts M, Subramanian P, Yorke JA, Salzberg SL. A whole-genome assembly of the domestic cow, Bos taurus. Genome Biol. 2009; doi:. 10. 1186/gb-2009-10-4-r42 webcite
• [24]Turner S, Armstrong LL, Bradford Y, Carlson CS, Dana C, Crenshaw AT, et al. Quality control procedures for genome wide association studies. Curr Proc Hum Genet. 2011;68:1–24.
• [25]Sargolzaei M, Chesnais JP, Schenkel FS. A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives. BMC Genomics. 2014; 15:478. BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Browning BL, Browning SR. A unified approach to genotype imputation and haplotype-phase inference for large data sets of trios and unrelated individuals. Am J Hum Genet. 2009; 84:210-23.
• [27]Daetwyler HD, Calus MPL, Pong-Wong R, de Los CG, Hickey JM. Genomic prediction in animals and plants: Simulation of data, validation, reporting, and benchmarking. Genetics. 2013; 193:347-365.
• [28]VanRaden PM. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. show [?A3B2 show $6#?] J Dairy Sci. 2008;91:4414–23.
• [29]Hickey JM, Kinghorn BP, Tier B, Van der Werf JHJ, Cleveland MA. A phasing and imputation method for pedigreed populations that results in a single-stage genomic evaluation. Genet Sel Evol. 2012; 44:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [30]Calus MPL, Bouwman AC, Hickey JM, Veerkamp RF, Mulder HA. Evaluation of measures of correctness of genotype imputation in the context of genomic prediction: a review of livestock applications. Animal. 2014;8:1743–53.
• [31]Piccoli ML, Braccini J, Cardoso FF, Sargolzaei M, Larmer SG, Schenkel FS. Accuracy of genome-wide imputation in Braford and Hereford beef cattle. BMC Genet. 2014; 15:157. BioMed Central Full Text
• [32]Hickey JM, Crossa J, Babu R, de los Campos G. Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Genotype Imputation in Populations from Several Maize Breeding Programs. Crop Sci. 2012; 52:654-663.
• [33]Mulder HA, Calus MPL, Druet T, Schrooten C. Imputation of genotypes with low-density chips and its effect on reliability of direct genomic values in Dutch Holstein cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2012; 95:876-889.
• [34]Khatkar MS, Moser G, Hayes BJ, Raadsma HW. Strategies and utility of imputed SNP genotypes for genomic analysis in dairy cattle. BMC Genomics. 2012; 13:538. BioMed Central Full Text
• [35]Ertl J, Edel C, Emmerling R, Pausch H, Fries R, Götz K-U. On the limited increase in validation reliability using high-density genotypes in genomic best linear unbiased prediction: observations from Fleckvieh cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2014; 97:487-96.
• [36]Pimentel ECG, Edel C, Emmerling R, Götz K-U. Imputation errors bias genomic predictions. J Dairy Sci. 2015; 98:4131-4138.
• [37]Zhang Z, Druet T. Marker imputation with low-density marker panels in Dutch Holstein cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2010; 93:5487-5494.
• [38]Erbe M, Hayes BJ, Matukumalli LK, Goswami S, Bowman PJ, Reich CM, et al. Improving accuracy of genomic predictions within and between dairy cattle breeds with imputed high-density single nucleotide polymorphism panels. J Dairy Sci. 2012;95:4114–29.
• [39]VanRaden PM, Null DJ, Sargolzaei M, Wiggans GR, Tooker ME, Cole JB, et al. Genomic imputation and evaluation using high-density Holstein genotypes. J Dairy Sci. 2013;96:668–78.