Implementation of genome-wide selection in wheat

Article

Abstract

With the expected development of thousands of molecular markers in most crops, the marker-assisted selection theory has recently shifted from the use of a few markers targeted in QTL regions (or derived from candidate or validated genes) to the use of many more markers covering the whole genome. These genome-wide markers are already used for association analysis between polymorphisms for anonymous markers and qualitative or quantitative traits. The condition for success is that a sufficient level of linkage disequilibrium (LD) exists between the adjacent markers used for genotyping and the true genes or QTLs. This LD is known to vary among species and type of genetic material. In selfing species, particularly among breeding lines, LD has been reported to range up to 1 cM or more. In such conditions, uncharacterized markers can be used to predict the breeding value of a trait without referring to actual QTLs. We present an example applying DArT markers to the INRA wheat breeding material in an attempt to implement whole genome selection as an alternative to phenotypic selection. This study assesses different models (GBLUP, Ridge Regression BLUP, Bayesian Ridge Regression and Lasso) and their ability to predict the yields of genotypes evaluated in a multi-site network from 2000 to 2009 in a highly unbalanced design. The prediction coefficients obtained by cross-validation techniques are encouraging, given the small size of the training population.

Keywords

genomic selection breeding value GBLUP Ridge regression LASSO 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Balding, D.J., Bishop, M., and Cannings, C., Handbook of Statistical Genetics, Chichester: UK: Wiley, 2007, vol. 2, pp. 919–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernardo, R., Moreau, L., and Charcosset, A., Number and Fitness of Selected Individuals in Marker-Assisted and Phenotypic Recurrent Selection, Crop Sci., 2006, vol. 46, pp. 1972–1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernardo, R. and Yu, J.M., Prospects for Genome-Wide Selection for Quantitative Traits in Maize, Crop Sci., 2007, vol. 47, pp. 1082–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanc, G., Charcosset, A., Veyrieras, J.B., et al., Marker-Assisted Selection Efficiency in Multiple Connected Populations: A Simulation Study Based on the Results of a QTL Detection Experiment in Maize, Euphytica, 2008, vol. 161, pp. 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de los Campos, G. and Perez, P., The Bayesian Linear Regression Package V.1.2, 2010. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/BLR/index.html
  6. Complementary Strategies to Raise Wheat Yield Potential, in Proc. Symp. Complementary Strategies to Raise Wheat Yield Potential, CIMMYT headquarters, Reynolds, M. and Eaton, D. Eds. November 10–13, 2009. Mexico: CIMMYT, 2009.Google Scholar
  7. Crossa, J., Campos, G., Perez, P., et al., Prediction of Genetic Values of Quantitative Traits in Plant Breeding Using Pedigree and Molecular Markers, Genetics, 2010, vol. 186, pp. 713–724.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eathington, S.R., Crosbie, T.M., Edwards, M.D., et al., Molecular Markers in a Commercial Breeding Program, Crop Sci., 2007, vol. 47, pp. 154–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. FAO. World Agriculture: Towards 2015/2030. Roma: FAO, 2002. 77 p.Google Scholar
  10. Gimelfarb, A. and Lande, R., Simulation of Marker Assisted Selection in Hybrid Populations, Genet. Res., 1994, vol. 63, pp. 39–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goddard, M.E. and Hayes, B.J., Genomic Selection, J. Anim. Breed. Genet., 2007, vol. 124, pp. 323–330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hayes, B.J., Bowman, P.J., Chamberlain, A.J., and Goddard, M.E., Genomic Selection in Dairy Cattle: Progress and Challenges: Invited Review, J. Dairy Sci., 2009, vol. 433–443.Google Scholar
  13. Heffner, E.L., Sorrells, M.E., and Jannink, J.L., Genomic Selection for Crop Improvement, Crop Sci., 2009, vol. 49, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heffner, E.L., Lorenz, A.J., Jannink, J.-L., and Sorrells, M.E., Plant Breeding with Genomic Selection: Gain per Unit Time and Cost, Crop Sci., 2010, vol. 50, pp. 1681–1690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Henderson, C.R., Best Linear Unbiased Estimation and Prediction under a Selection Model, Biometrics, 1975, vol. 31, pp. 423–444.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hospital, F., Moreau, L., Lacoudre, F., et al., More on the Efficiency of Marker-Assisted Selection, Theor. Appl, Genet., 1997, vol. 95, pp. 1181–1189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Iwata, H. and Jannink, J.L., Accuracy of Genomic Selection Prediction in Barley Breeding Programs: A Simulation Study Based on the Real Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Data of Barley Breeding Lines, Crop Sci., 2011, vol. 51, pp. 1915–1927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jannink, J.L., Lorenz, A.J., and Iwata, H., Genomic Selection in Plant Breeding: from Theory To Practice, Brief, Funct. Genom. Proteom., 2010, vol. 9, pp. 166–177.Google Scholar
  19. Lande, R. and Thompson, R., Efficiency of Marker-Assisted Selection in the Improvement of Quantitative Traits, Genetics, 1990, vol. 124, pp. 743–756.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lorenzana, R.E. and Bernardo, R., Accuracy of Genotypic Value Predictions for Marker-Based Selection in Biparental Plant Populations, Theor. Appl. Genet., 2009, vol. 120, pp. 151–161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Meuwissen, T.H.E., Hayes, B., and Goddard, M.E., Prediction of Total Genetic Value Using Genome-Wide Dense Marker Maps, Genetics, 2001, vol. 157, pp. 1819–1829.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Moreau, L., Charcosset, A., Hospital, F., and Gallais, A., Marker-Assisted Selection Efficiency in Populations of Finite Size, Genetics, 1998, vol. 148, pp. 1353–1365.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Perez, P., Campos, G., Crossa, J., and Gianola, D., Genomic-Enabled Prediction Based on Molecular Markers and Pedigree Using the BLR Package in R, Plant Genome, 2010, vol. 3, pp. 106–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Piepho, H.P., Ridge Regression and Extensions for Genomewide Selection in Maize, Crop Sci., 2009, vol. 49, pp. 1165–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2011. http://www.R-project.org Google Scholar
  26. Wheat Facts and Futures. Dixon, J., Braun, H.J., Kosina, P., and Crouch, J. Eds. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT, 2009.Google Scholar
  27. Whittaker, J.C., Thompson, R., and Denham, M.C., Marker-Assisted Selection Using Ridge Regression, Genet. Res., 2000, vol. 75, pp. 249–252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhong, S.Q., Dekkers, J.C.M., Fernando, R.L., and Janink, J.L., Factors Affecting Accuracy from Genomic Selection in Populations Derived from Multiple Inbred Lines: A Barley Case Study, Genetics, 2009, vol. 182, pp. 355–364.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INRA-UMPUMR Genetics, Diversity, Ecophysiology of CerealsClermont-FerrandFrance

Personalised recommendations