A targeted genotyping-by-sequencing tool (Rapture) for genomics-assisted breeding in oat

  • Wubishet A. Bekele
  • Asuka Itaya
  • Brian Boyle
  • Weikai Yan
  • Jennifer Mitchell Fetch
  • Nicholas A. TinkerEmail author
Original Article


We adapted and tested a Rapture assay as an enhancement of genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) in oat (Avena sativa). This assay was based on an additional bait-based capture of specific DNA fragments representing approximately 10,000 loci within the enzyme-based complexity reduction provided by GBS. By increasing the specificity of GBS to include only those fragments that provided effective polymorphic markers, it was possible to achieve deeper sequence coverage of target markers, while simultaneously sequencing a greater number of samples on a single unit of next-generation sequencing. The Rapture assay consistently out-performed the GBS assay when filtering markers at 80% completeness or greater, even though the total number of reads per sample was only 25% that of GBS. The reduced sequencing cost per sample for Rapture more than compensated for the increased cost of the capture reaction. Thus, Rapture generated a more repeatable set of marker data at a cost per sample that was approximately 40% less than GBS. Additional advantages of Rapture included accurate identification of heterozygotes, and the possibility to increase the depth or length of sequence reads with less impact on the cost per sample. We tested Rapture for genomic selection and diversity analysis and concluded that it is an effective alternative to GBS or other SNP assays. We recommend the use of Rapture in oat and the development of similar assays in other crops with large complex genomes.



The authors gratefully acknowledge professional assistance from Matthew Hayes, Brad De Haan, Denis Green, Kali Stewart, Julie Chapados, Kasia Dadej, and Wayne McCormick, as well as useful discussions and input from Charlene Wight, Alireza Nakhforoosh, and Shiaoman Chao. This work was funded as part of the ‘Oat Project’ through the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada AgriScience Program, with matching industry support from the Canadian Field Crop Research Alliance (CFCRA).

Author contribution statement

WAB, AI and NAT performed data analysis and wrote the manuscript; BB suggested the Rapture technique and advised on its development; AI and BB performed laboratory analyses; WY and JMF provided biological materials and advised on data interpretation. All authors edited and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

122_2019_3496_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (857 kb)
Design and full sequence data for the myBaits capture probes (XLSX 856 kb)
122_2019_3496_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (81 kb)
Key for de-multiplexing raw sequence files (available at (XLSX 80 kb)
122_2019_3496_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx (38 kb)
Example of a Haplotag GBS passport showing tag-level haplotypes and tag counts for GBS versus Rapture assays performed on the same set of accessions (XLSX 38 kb)


  1. Ali OA, O’Rourke SM, Amish SJ, Meek MH, Luikart G, Jeffres C, Miller MR (2016) RAD capture (Rapture): flexible and efficient sequence-based genotyping. Genetics 202:389–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asoro FG, Newell MA, Beavis WD, Scott MP, Tinker NA, Jannink J-L (2013) Genomic, marker-assisted, and pedigree-BLUP selection methods for β-glucan concentration in elite oat. Crop Sci 53:1894–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baloch FS, Alsaleh A, Shahid MQ, Çiftçi V, de Miera LES, Aasim M, Nadeem MA, Aktaş H, Özkan H, Hatipoğlu R (2017) A whole genome DArTseq and SNP analysis for genetic diversity assessment in durum wheat from central fertile crescent. PLoS ONE 12:e0167821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bekele WA, Wight CP, Chao S, Howarth CJ, Tinker NA (2018) Haplotype based genotyping-by-sequencing in oat genome research. Plant Biotechnol J 16:1452–1463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boudhrioua C, Bastien M, Légaré G, Pomerleau S, St-Cyr J, Boyle B, Belzile F (2017) Genotyping-by-sequencing in potato. In: Kumar Chakrabarti S, Xie C, Kumar Tiwari J (eds) The potato genome. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradbury PJ, Zhang Z, Kroon DE, Casstevens TM, Ramdoss Y, Buckler ES (2007) TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics 23:2633–2635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaffin AS, Huang Y-F, Smith S, Bekele WA, Babiker E, Gnanesh BN, Foresman BJ, Blanchard SG, Jay JJ, Reid RW, Wight CP, Chao S, Oliver R, Islamovic E, Kolb FL, McCartney C, Mitchell Fetch JW, Beattie AD, Bjørnstad Å, Bonman JM, Langdon T, Howarth CJ, Brouwer CR, Jellen EN, Esvelt Klos K, Poland JA, Hseih T-F, Brown R, Jackson E, Schlueter JA, Tinker NA (2016) A consensus map in cultivated hexaploid oat reveals conserved grass synteny with substantial sub-genome rearrangement. Plant Genome. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dorant Y, Benestan L, Normandeau E, Boyle B, Rochette R, Bernatchez L (2019) Comparing Pool-seq, Rapture and GBS genotyping for inferring population structure; the American lobster (Homarus americanus) as a case study. Ecol Evolut 9(11):6606–6623Google Scholar
  9. Elshire RJ, Glaubitz JC, Sun Q, Poland JA, Kawamoto K, Buckler ES, Mitchell SE (2011) A robust, simple genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach for high diversity species. PLoS ONE 6:e19379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Endelman JB (2011) Ridge regression and other kernels for genomic selection with R package rrBLUP. Plant Genome 4:250–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Esvelt Klos K, Huang Y-F, Bekele WA, Obert DE, Babiker E, Beattie AD, Bjørnstad Å, Bonman JM, Carson ML, Chao S, Gnanesh BN, Griffiths I, Harrison SA, Howarth CJ, Hu G, Ibrahim A, Islamovic E, Jackson E, Jannink JL, Kolb FL, McMullen MS, Mitchell Fetch JW, Murphy JP, Ohm HW, Rines HW, Rossnagel BG, Schlueter JA, Sorrells ME, Wight CP, Yan W, Tinker NA (2016) Population genomics related to adaptation in elite oat germplasm. Plant Genome 9:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guo Z, Wang H, Tao J, Ren Y, Xu C, Wu K, Zou C, Zhang J, Xu Y (2019) Development of multiple SNP marker panels affordable to breeders through genotyping by target sequencing (GBTS) in maize. Mol Breed 39:37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heffner EL, Jannink J-L, Sorrells ME (2011) Genomic selection accuracy using multifamily prediction models in a wheat breeding program. Plant Genome 4:65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hickey JM, Dreisigacker S, Crossa J, Hearne S, Babu R, Prasanna BM, Grondona M, Zambelli A, Windhausen VS, Mathews K (2014) Evaluation of genomic selection training population designs and genotyping strategies in plant breeding programs using simulation. Crop Sci 54:1476–1488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huang YF, Poland JA, Wight CP, Jackson EW, Tinker NA (2014) Using genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) for genomic discovery in cultivated oat. PLoS ONE 9:e102448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lorenz AJ, Smith KP, Jannink J-L (2012) Potential and optimization of genomic selection for fusarium head blight resistance in six-row barley. Crop Sci 52:1609–1621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lu F, Lipka AE, Glaubitz J, Elshire R, Cherney JH, Casler MD, Buckler ES, Costich DE (2013) Switchgrass genomic diversity, ploidy, and evolution: novel insights from a network-based SNP discovery protocol. PLoS Genet 9:e1003215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Miller MR, Dunham JP, Amores A, Cresko WA, Johnson EA (2007) Rapid and cost-effective polymorphism identification and genotyping using restriction site associated DNA (RAD) markers. Genome Res 17:240–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Money D, Gardner K, Migicovsky Z, Schwaninger H, Zhong G-Y, Myles S (2015) LinkImpute: fast and accurate genotype imputation for nonmodel organisms. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 5:2383–2390Google Scholar
  20. Norman A, Taylor J, Edwards J, Kuchel H (2018) Optimising genomic selection in wheat: effect of marker density, population size and population structure on prediction accuracy. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 8:2889–2899Google Scholar
  21. Perrier X, Jacquemoud-Collet JP (2006) DARwin software Accessed 2 Dec 2019
  22. Poland JA, Brown PJ, Sorrells ME, Jannink J-L (2012) Development of high-density genetic maps for barley and wheat using a novel two-enzyme genotyping-by-sequencing approach. PLoS ONE 7:e32253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. R Core Team (2018) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Accessed 2 Dec 2019
  24. Sunstrum FG, Bekele WA, Wight CP, Yan W, Chen Y, Tinker NA (2019) A genetic linkage map in southern-by-spring oat identifies multiple QTLs for adaptation and rust resistance. Plant Breed 138:82–94Google Scholar
  25. Tinker NA, Chao S, Lazo GR, Oliver RE, Huang Y-F, Poland JA, Jellen EN, Maughan PJ, Kilian A, Jackson EW (2014) A SNP genotyping array for hexaploid oat. Plant Genome. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tinker NA, Bekele WA, Hattori J (2016) Haplotag: software for haplotype-based genotyping-by-sequencing analysis. G3 Genes Genomes Genet 6:857–863Google Scholar
  27. Truong HT, Ramos AM, Yalcin F, de Ruiter M, van der Poel HJ, Huvenaars KH, Hogers RC, van Enckevort LJ, Janssen A, van Orsouw NJ (2012) Sequence-based genotyping for marker discovery and co-dominant scoring in germplasm and populations. PLoS ONE 7:e37565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yan H, Bekele WA, Wight CP, Peng Y, Langdon T, Latta RG, Fu Y-B, Diederichsen A, Howarth CJ, Jellen EN, Boyle B, Wei Y, Tinker NA (2016) High-density marker profiling confirms ancestral genomes of Avena species and identifies d-genome chromosomes of hexaploid oat. Theor Appl Genet 129:2133–2149CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CROWN 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ottawa Research and Development CentreAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Plateforme d’Analyses Génomiques, Institut de Biologie Intégrative et des SystèmesUniversité LavalQuébec CityCanada
  3. 3.Brandon Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaBrandonCanada

Personalised recommendations