A definition of unknown parent groups based on bull usage patterns across herds

In genetic evaluations, the definition of unknown parent groups (UPG) is usually based on time periods, selection path and flows of foreign founders. The definition of UPG may be more complex for populations presenting genetic heterogeneity due to both, large national expansion and coexistence of artificial insemination (AI) and natural service (NS). A UPG definition method accounting for beef bull flows was proposed and applied to the French Charolais cattle population. It assumed that, at a given time period, unknown parents belonged to the same UPG when their progeny were bred in herds that used bulls with similar origins (birth region and reproduction way). Thus, the birth period, region and AI rate of a herd were pointed out to be the three criteria reflecting genetic disparities at the national level in a beef cattle population. To deal with regional genetic disparities, 14 regions were identified using a factorial approach combining principal component analysis and Ward clustering. The selection nucleus of the French cattle population was dispersed over three main breeding areas. Flows of NS bulls were mainly carried out within each breeding area. On the contrary, the use and the selection of AI bulls were based on a national pool of candidates. Within a time period, herds of different regions were clustered together when they used bulls coming from the same origin and with an estimated difference of genetic level lower than 20% of genetic standard deviation (σg) for calf muscle and skeleton scores (SS) at weaning. This led to the definition of 16 UPG of sires, which were validated as robust and relevant in a sire model, meaning numerically stable and corresponding to distinct genetic subpopulations. The UPG genetic levels were estimated for muscle and SS under sire and animal models. Whatever the trait, differences between bull UPG estimates within a time period could reach 0.5 σg across regions. For a given time period, bull UPG estimates for muscle and SS were generally larger by 0.30 to 0.75 σg than those of cows. Including genetic groups in the evaluation model increased the estimated genetic trends by 20% to 30%. It also provoked re-ranking in favor of bulls and cows without pedigree.     

High-density marker imputation accuracy in sixteen French cattle breeds

Background

Genotyping with the medium-density Bovine SNP50 BeadChip^® (50K) is now standard in cattle. The high-density BovineHD BeadChip^®, which contains 777 609 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), was developed in 2010. Increasing marker density increases the level of linkage disequilibrium between quantitative trait loci (QTL) and SNPs and the accuracy of QTL localization and genomic selection. However, re-genotyping all animals with the high-density chip is not economically feasible. An alternative strategy is to genotype part of the animals with the high-density chip and to impute high-density genotypes for animals already genotyped with the 50K chip. Thus, it is necessary to investigate the error rate when imputing from the 50K to the high-density chip.

Methods

Five thousand one hundred and fifty three animals from 16 breeds (89 to 788 per breed) were genotyped with the high-density chip. Imputation error rates from the 50K to the high-density chip were computed for each breed with a validation set that included the 20% youngest animals. Marker genotypes were masked for animals in the validation population in order to mimic 50K genotypes. Imputation was carried out using the Beagle 3.3.0 software.

Results

Mean allele imputation error rates ranged from 0.31% to 2.41% depending on the breed. In total, 1980 SNPs had high imputation error rates in several breeds, which is probably due to genome assembly errors, and we recommend to discard these in future studies. Differences in imputation accuracy between breeds were related to the high-density-genotyped sample size and to the genetic relationship between reference and validation populations, whereas differences in effective population size and level of linkage disequilibrium showed limited effects. Accordingly, imputation accuracy was higher in breeds with large populations and in dairy breeds than in beef breeds. More than 99% of the alleles were correctly imputed if more than 300 animals were genotyped at high-density. No improvement was observed when multi-breed imputation was performed.

Conclusion

In all breeds, imputation accuracy was higher than 97%, which indicates that imputation to the high-density chip was accurate. Imputation accuracy depends mainly on the size of the reference population and the relationship between reference and target populations.     

APIS: An auto‐adaptive parentage inference software that tolerates missing parents

In the context of parentage assignment using genomic markers, key issues are genotyping errors and an absence of parent genotypes because of sampling, traceability or genotyping problems. Most likelihood‐based parentage assignment software programs require a priori estimates of genotyping errors and the proportion of missing parents to set up meaningful assignment decision rules. We present here the R package APIS, which can assign offspring to their parents without any prior information other than the offspring and parental genotypes, and a user‐defined, acceptable error rate among assigned offspring. Assignment decision rules use the distributions of average Mendelian transmission probabilities, which enable estimates of the proportion of offspring with missing parental genotypes. APIS has been compared to other software (CERVUS, VITASSIGN), on a real European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) single nucleotide polymorphism data set. The type I error rate (false positives) was lower with APIS than with other software, especially when parental genotypes were missing, but the true positive rate was also lower, except when the theoretical exclusion power reached 0.99999. In general, APIS provided assignments that satisfied the user‐set acceptable error rate of 1% or 5%, even when tested on simulated data with high genotyping error rates (1% or 3%) and up to 50% missing sires. Because it uses the observed distribution of Mendelian transmission probabilities, APIS is best suited to assigning parentage when numerous offspring (>200) are genotyped. We have demonstrated that APIS is an easy‐to‐use and reliable software for parentage assignment, even when up to 50% of sires are missing.     

Genetic control of multiple births in low ovulating mammalian species

In mammals, litter size is a highly variable trait. Some species such as humans or cattle are monotocous, with one or sometimes two newborns per birth, whereas others, the polytocous species such as mice or pigs, are highly prolific and often produce a dozen newborns at each farrowing. In monotocous species, however, two or three newborns per birth may sometime be unwanted. In more polytocous species such as sheep or pigs, litter size is studied in order to increase livestock prolificacy. By contrast, twinning rates in humans or cattle may increase birth difficulties and health problems in the newborns. In this context, the aim of our review was to provide a clearer understanding of the genetic and physiological factors that control multiple births in low-ovulating mammalian species, with particular focus on three species: sheep, cattle, and humans, where knowledge of the ovulation rate in one may enlighten findings in the others. This article therefore reviews the phenotypic and genetic variability observed with respect to ovulation and twinning rates. It then presents the QTL and major genes that have been identified in each species. Finally, we draw a picture of the diversity of the physiological mechanisms underlying multiple ovulation. Although several major genes have been discovered in sheep, QTL detection methods in humans or cattle have suggested that the determinism of litter size is complex and probably involves several genes in order to explain variations in the number of ovulations.     

Soluble form of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, E- and L-selectin in human milk

In breast milk and paired serum from 70 lactating women and 40 of their term, infection-free neonates, on the 2nd and 5th day postpartum slCAM-1, sVCAM-1, sE- and sL-selectin were measured by ELISA and compared with those in 26 healthy adults (controls). Seven infant formulas and fresh milk from five cows were also analyzed. Human colostrum values of slCAM-1, sVCAM-1 (similar to those in maternal and control serum), sE-selectin and sL-selectin (-10 and -100 times lower than in maternal and control serum) were significantly higher than those in milk, while they varied widely. None of the adhesion molecules was detected in fresh cow's milk or infant formulas. Exclusively breast-fed infants showed significantly higher values of slCAM-1 and sL-selectin on the 2nd day of life than those supplemented also with formula. Only slCAM-1 values correlated positively between colostrum and time-matched maternal serum. These findings show in human milk important amounts of slCAM-1 and sVCAM-1 but minimal amounts of sE- and sL-selectin, which could affect the immune system of the neonate.     

Investigation of three strategies for an international genetic evaluation of beef cattle weaning weight

Weaning weights from 83 389 Limousin calves born between 1993 and 2002 in France and the Trans-Tasman block (Australia/New Zealand) were analysed to compare different strategies for running an international genetic evaluation for the breed. These records were a subset of the complete data for both countries and comprised a sample of herds that had recorded progeny of sires used across both countries. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for weaning weight were estimated within the countries. The estimates of direct genetic heritabilities were higher in France than in the Trans-Tasman block (0.31 vs. 0.22), while direct-maternal genetic correlations were less negative in the Trans-Tasman block (-0.10) than in France (-0.21). Different strategies for an international evaluation were studied, and the correlations between the estimated breeding values (EBV) of national evaluations and these strategies were derived. The international evaluation strategies were a) an animal model on raw performance data with non unity genetic correlations and heterogeneous residual and genetic variances across countries; b) the same animal model applied to pre-corrected (for fixed effects) performance data; and c) a sire model on de-regressed proofs (MACE). Estimates of the genetic correlations between weaning weight in both countries were 0.86 (0.80) for direct (maternal) genetic effects for the first strategy. Estimation of variance components by MACE appeared to be very sensitive to the sample of bulls and their reliability approximations. Variance component estimates obtained using pre-corrected data were inconsistent with estimates on raw data. However, the EBV predicted using pre-corrected data and parameters estimated from the raw data were similar to those predicted from raw data. Correlations between national and international EBV were always high (> 0.90) for sires, whichever genetic effect (direct or maternal) or international evaluation model was considered. The ranking of the bulls in the top 100 is of primary interest in terms of international genetic evaluation. In this study, some re-ranking of sires was observed for the top 100 bulls between countries and between the three international evaluation models. Thus, the origin of top sires may vary according to the implemented international evaluation strategy.     

Economic aspects of implementing genomic evaluations in a pig sire line breeding scheme

Background

Replacing pedigree-based BLUP evaluations by genomic evaluations in pig breeding schemes can result in greater selection accuracy and genetic gains, especially for traits with limited phenotypes. However, this methodological change would generate additional costs. The objective of this study was to determine whether additional expenditures would be more profitably devoted to implementing genomic evaluations or to increasing phenotyping capacity while retaining traditional evaluations.

Methods

Stochastic simulation was used to simulate a population with 1050 breeding females and 50 boars that was selected for 10 years for a breeding goal with two uncorrelated traits with heritabilities of 0.4. The reference breeding scheme was based on phenotyping 13 770 candidates per year for trait 1 and 270 sibs of candidates per year for trait 2, with selection based on pedigree-based BLUP estimated breeding values. Increased expenditures were allocated to either increasing the phenotyping capacity for trait 2 while maintaining traditional evaluations, or to implementing genomic selection. The genomic scheme was based on two training populations: one for trait 2, consisting of phenotyped sibs of the candidates whose number increased from 1000 to 3430 over time, and one for trait 1, consisting of the selection candidates. Several genomic scenarios were tested, where the size of the training population for trait 1, and the number of genotyped candidates pre-selected based on their parental estimated breeding value, varied.

Results

Both approaches resulted in higher genetic trends for the population breeding goal and lower rates of inbreeding compared to the reference scheme. However, even a very marked increase in phenotyping capacity for trait 2 could not match improvements achieved with genomic selection when the number of genotyped candidates was large. Genotyping just a limited number of pre-selected candidates significantly reduced the extra costs, while preserving most of the benefits in terms of genetic trends and inbreeding. Implementing genomic evaluations was the most efficient approach when major expenditure was possible, whereas increasing phenotypes was preferable when limited resources were available.

Conclusions

Economic decisions on implementing genomic evaluations in a pig nucleus population must take account of population characteristics, phenotyping and genotyping costs, and available funds.     

Should genetic groups be fitted in BLUP evaluation? Practical answer for the French AI beef sire evaluation

Some analytical and simulated criteria were used to determine whether a priori genetic differences among groups, which are not accounted for by the relationship matrix, ought to be fitted in models for genetic evaluation, depending on the data structure and the accuracy of the evaluation. These criteria were the mean square error of some extreme contrasts between animals, the true genetic superiority of animals selected across groups, i.e. the selection response, and the magnitude of selection bias (difference between true and predicted selection responses). The different statistical models studied considered either fixed or random genetic groups (based on six different years of birth) versus ignoring the genetic group effects in a sire model. Including fixed genetic groups led to an overestimation of selection response under BLUP selection across groups despite the unbiasedness of the estimation, i.e. despite the correct estimation of differences between genetic groups. This overestimation was extremely important in numerical applications which considered two kinds of within-station progeny test designs for French purebred beef cattle AI sire evaluation across years: the reference sire design and the repeater sire design. When assuming a priori genetic differences due to the existence of a genetic trend of around 20% of genetic standard deviation for a trait with h² = 0.4, in a repeater sire design, the overestimation of the genetic superiority of bulls selected across groups varied from about 10% for an across-year selection rate p = 1/6 and an accurate selection index (100 progeny records per sire) to 75% for p = 1/2 and a less accurate selection index (20 progeny records per sire). This overestimation decreased when the genetic trend, the heritability of the trait, the accuracy of the evaluation or the connectedness of the design increased. Whatever the data design, a model of genetic evaluation without groups was preferred to a model with genetic groups when the genetic trend was in the range of likely values in cattle breeding programs (0 to 20% of genetic standard deviation). In such a case, including random groups was pointless and including fixed groups led to a large overestimation of selection response, smaller true selection response across groups and larger variance of estimation of the differences between groups. Although the genetic trend was correctly predicted by a model fitting fixed genetic groups, important errors in predicting individual breeding values led to incorrect ranking of animals across groups and, consequently, led to lower selection response.