Abstract
Single-step best linear unbiased prediction (HBLUP) is a method used to predict breeding values by combining pairwise relatedness information derived from a pedigree with the realized relationships estimated from DNA markers. It is an ideal approach for the lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. ex. Loud.) breeding program which has an extensive progeny testing program but a small proportion of trees that are genotyped. However, it is unclear what level of genotyping is required to affect prediction accuracy and genetic parameters, the performance across test sites and test cycles of different ages, and the ability to accurately rank trees within half-sib and full-sib families. Lodgepole pine trees were sampled from four progeny test sites in British Columbia, Canada. A SNP array was used to genotype 1569 trees which resulted in 19,584 high-quality SNPs. The prediction accuracy of HBLUP was compared to (1) an uncorrected relationship matrix (ABLUP) and (2) BLUP using a realized relationship matrix based on SNP markers (GBLUP) using various cross-validation scenarios for height growth at age 10 and 5 wood quality traits. Combining average and realized pairwise relationship information through the H-matrix resulted in heritability and Type B genetic correlation estimates that were generally a compromise between estimates for ABLUP (0% genotyping) and GBLUP (100% genotyping). The highest heritability was for average wood density (0.57 for ABLUP; 0.51 for HBLUP; 0.47 for GBLUP) and the lowest was for height (0.24 for ABLUP; 0.27 for HBLUP; 0.25 for GBLUP). GBLUP always had the lowest Type B genetic correlations (except for earlywood density) of the three models (0.46 to 1.0) assessed. The prediction accuracy for HBLUP increased slightly for genotyped trees (0.77 to 0.80), but not for non-genotyped trees as genotyping effort increased. Furthermore, prediction accuracy was high when predicting between environments (0.46 to 0.85) and test cycles (0.33 to 0.76) when connected through pedigree, and prediction was more accurate when using older first-cycle tests to predict breeding values for younger second-cycle tests for all traits, except microfibril angle. Rank correlations for trees within half-sib and full-sib families when predicting values across test cycles (the training population is phenotyped and the validation population is genotyped) were very low using HBLUP (0.08) compared to GBLUP (0.38) but increased to 0.25 when 40% of the trees in the training population were genotyped (HBLUP40). HBLUP should be regarded as an effective way to combine average and realized relationship information in a breeding program for more precise estimates of genetic parameters and breeding values and can be used for predicting and ranking trees within families without phenotypic data when genotyped trees from the same families are included in the training population (genotyped and phenotyped).
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aguilar I, Misztal I, Johnson DL, Legarra A, Tsuruta S, Lawlor TJ (2010) A unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score. J Dairy Sci 93(2):743–752. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2730
Baltunis BS, Gapare WJ, Wu HX (2010) Genetic parameters and genotype by environment interaction in radiata pine for growth and wood quality traits in Australia. Silvae Genet 59(2–3):113–124
Beaulieu J, Doerksen T, Clément S, Mackay J, Bousquet J (2014a) Accuracy of genomic selection models in a large population of open-pollinated families in white spruce. Heredity (Edinb) 113(4):343–352. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2014.36
Beaulieu J, Doerksen TK, MacKay J, Rainville A, Bousquet J (2014b) Genomic selection accuracies within and between environments and small breeding groups in white spruce. BMC Genomics 15(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-1048
Cappa EP, El-kassaby YA, Muñoz F, Garcia MN (2017) Improving accuracy of breeding values by incorporating genomic information in spatial-competition mixed models. Mol Breed 37:125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11032-017-0725-6
Christensen OF, Lund MS (2010) Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genet Sel Evol 42(2):1–8
Christensen OF, Madsen P, Nielsen B, Ostersen T, Su G (2012) Single-step methods for genomic evaluation in pigs. Animal 6(10):1565–1571. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112000742
de Almeida Filho JE, Guimarães JFR, e Silva FF, de Resende MDV, Muñoz P, Kirst M, Resende MFR (2016) The contribution of dominance to phenotype prediction in a pine breeding and simulated population. Heredity (Edinb) 117(1):33–41. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2016.23
Durán R, Isik F, Zapata-Valenzuela J, Balocchi C, Valenzuela S (2017) Genomic predictions of breeding values in a cloned Eucalyptus globulus population in Chile. Tree Genet Genomes 13(4):74. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-017-1158-4
Forni S, Aguilar I, Misztal I (2011) Different genomic relationship matrices for single-step analysis using phenotypic , pedigree and genomic information. Genet Sel Evol 43:1
Gamal El-Dien O, Ratcliffe B, Klápště J, Chen C, Porth I, El-Kassaby YA (2015) Prediction accuracies for growth and wood attributes of interior spruce in space using genotyping-by-sequencing. BMC Genomics 16(1):370. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-015-1597-y
Grattapaglia D (2017) Genomic selection for crop improvement. In: Status and perspectives of genomic selection in forest tree breeding. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 199–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63170-7_9
Guillaume F, Fritz S, Boichard D, Druet T (2008) Correlations of marker-assisted breeding values with progeny-test breeding values for eight hundred ninety-nine French Holstein bulls. J Dairy Sci 91(6):2520–2522 . Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0829
Henderson CR (1975) Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31(2):423–447
Klápště J, Lstibůrek M, El-Kassaby YA (2014) Estimates of genetic parameters and breeding values from western larch open-pollinated families using marker-based relationship. Tree Genet Genomes 10(2):241–249. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-013-0673-1
Klápště J, Suontama M, Telfer E, Graham N, Low C, Stovold T, McKinley R, Dungey H (2017) Exploration of genetic architecture through sib-ship reconstruction in advanced breeding population of Eucalyptus nitens. PLoS One 12(9) Public Library of Science:e0185137. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185137
Klápště J, Suontama M, Dungey HS, Telfer EJ, Graham NJ, Low CB, Stovold GT (2018) Effect of hidden relatedness on single-step genetic evaluation in an advanced open-pollinated breeding program. J Hered 109(7):802–810. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esy051
Korecký J, Klápště J, Lstibůrek M, Kobliha J, Nelson CD, El-Kassaby YA (2013) Comparison of genetic parameters from marker-based relationship, sibship, and combined models in scots pine multi-site open-pollinated tests. Tree Genet Genomes 9(5):1227–1235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-013-0630-z
Legarra A, Aguilar I, Misztal I (2009) A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. J Dairy Sci 92(9):4656–4663. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2061
Li Y, Dungey HS (2018) Expected benefit of genomic selection over forward selection in conifer breeding and deployment. PLoS One 13(12):e0208232. Public Library of Science. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208232
Lindgren D, Gea L, Jefferson P (1996) Loss of genetic diversity monitored by status number. Silvae Genet 45:52–59
Mansfield SD, Parish R, Goudie JW, Kang KY, Ott P (2007) The effects of crown ratio on the transition from juvenile to mature wood production in lodgepole pine in western Canada. Can J For Res 37(8):1450–1459. https://doi.org/10.1139/X06-299
Mansfield SD, Parish R, Di Lucca M, Goudie J, Kang K-Y, Ott P (2009) Revisiting the transition between juvenile and mature wood: a comparison of fibre length, microfibril angle and relative wood density in lodgepole pine. Holzforschung 63:449–456. https://doi.org/10.1515/HF.2009.069
Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2001) Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157:1819–1829
Meuwissen THE, Luan T, Woolliams JA (2011) The unified approach to the use of genomic and pedigree information in genomic evaluations revisited. J Anim Breed Genet 128(6):429–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0388.2011.00966.x
Misztal I, Legarra A, Aguilar I (2009) Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information. J Dairy Sci 92(9):4648–4655. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2064
Neale DB, Wegrzyn JL, Stevens KA, Zimin AV, Puiu D, Crepeau MW, Cardeno C, Koriabine M, Holtz-Morris AE, Liechty JD, Martínez-García PJ, Vasquez-Gross HA, Lin BY, Zieve JJ, Dougherty WM, Fuentes-Soriano S, Wu LS, Gilbert D, Marçais G, Roberts M, Holt C, Yandell M, Davis JM, Smith KE, Dean JFD, Lorenz WW, Whetten RW, Sederoff R, Wheeler N, McGuire PE, Main D, Loopstra CA, Mockaitis K, DeJong PJ, Yorke JA, Salzberg SL, Langley CH (2014) Decoding the massive genome of loblolly pine using haploid DNA and novel assembly strategies. Genome Biol 15(3):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2014-15-3-r59
Ratcliffe B, Gamal El-Dien O, Cappa EP, Porth I, Klapste J, Chen C, El-kassaby YA (2017) Single-step BLUP with varying genotyping effort in open-pollinated Picea glauca. Genes Genomes Genet 7(March):935–942. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.6rd6f
Resende MDV, Resende MFR Jr, Sansaloni CP, Petroli CD, Missiaggia AA, Aguiar AM, Abad JM, Takahashi EK, Rosado AM, Faria DA, Pappas GJ Jr, Kilian A, Grattapaglia D (2012a) Genomic selection for growth and wood quality in Eucalyptus: capturing the missing heritability and accelerating breeding for complex traits in forest trees. New Phytol 194(1):116–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.04038.x
Resende MFR, Muñoz P, Resende MDV, Garrick DJ, Fernando RL, Davis JM, Jokela EJ, Martin TA, Peter GF, Kirst M (2012b) Accuracy of genomic selection methods in a standard data set of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.). Genetics 190(4):1503–1510. Genetics Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.111.137026
Resende RT, Resende MDV, Silva FF, Azevedo CF, Takahashi EK, Silva-Junior OB, Grattapaglia D (2017) Assessing the expected response to genomic selection of individuals and families in Eucalyptus breeding with an additive-dominant model. Heredity (Edinb) 119(4):245–255. Nature Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2017.37
Suren H, Hodgins KA, Yeaman S, Nurkowski KA, Smets P, Rieseberg LH, Aitken SN, Holliday JA (2016) Exome capture from the spruce and pine giga-genomes. Mol Ecol Resour 16(5):1136–1146. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12570
Thistlethwaite FR, Ratcliffe B, Klápště J, Porth I, Chen C, Stoehr MU, El-Kassaby YA (2017) Genomic prediction accuracies in space and time for height and wood density of Douglas-fir using exome capture as the genotyping platform. BMC Genomics 18:930. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-017-4258-5
Ukrainetz NK, Mansfield SD (2020) Assessing the sensitivities of genomic selection for growth and wood quality traits in lodgepole pine using Bayesian models. Tree Genet Genomes 16:14
Ukrainetz NK, Yanchuk AD, Mansfield SD (2018) Climatic drivers of genotype–environment interactions in lodgepole pine based on multi-environment trial data and a factor analytic model of additive covariance. Can J For Res 48(7):835–854. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2017-0367
VanRaden PM (2008) Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J Dairy Sci 91(11):4414–4423. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0980
Wang J (2004) Sibship reconstruction from genetic data with typing errors. Genetics 166(4):1963–1979. https://doi.org/10.1534/GENETICS.166.4.1963
Yeaman S, Hodgins KA, Lotterhos KE, Suren H, Nadeau S, Degner JC, Nurkowski KA, Smets P, Wang T, Gray LK, Liepe KJ, Hamann A, Holliday JA, Whitlock MC, Rieseberg LH, Aitken SN (2016) Convergent local adaptation to climate in distantly related conifers. Science (80-) 353(6306):23–26
Zapata-Valenzuela J, Whetten RW, Neale D, McKeand S, Isik F (2013) Genomic estimated breeding values using genomic relationship matrices in a cloned population of loblolly pine. Genes Genomes Genet 3(May):909–916. https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.113.005975
Data archiving statement
All raw SNP data will be submitted to dbSNP on the public website hosted by National Cancer for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) National Cancer for Biotechnology Information (NCBI): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP, where submitted SNPs can be downloaded via anonymous FTP at ftp://ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/snp/.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by D. Chagné
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ukrainetz, N.K., Mansfield, S.D. Prediction accuracy of single-step BLUP for growth and wood quality traits in the lodgepole pine breeding program in British Columbia. Tree Genetics & Genomes 16, 64 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-020-01456-w
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-020-01456-w