↓ Skip to main content

Genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics Selection Evolution, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
108 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genomic prediction using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle
Published in
Genetics Selection Evolution, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12711-015-0149-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rianne van Binsbergen, Mario P. L. Calus, Marco C. A. M. Bink, Fred A. van Eeuwijk, Chris Schrooten, Roel F. Veerkamp

Abstract

In contrast to currently used single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panels, the use of whole-genome sequence data is expected to enable the direct estimation of the effects of causal mutations on a given trait. This could lead to higher reliabilities of genomic predictions compared to those based on SNP genotypes. Also, at each generation of selection, recombination events between a SNP and a mutation can cause decay in reliability of genomic predictions based on markers rather than on the causal variants. Our objective was to investigate the use of imputed whole-genome sequence genotypes versus high-density SNP genotypes on (the persistency of) the reliability of genomic predictions using real cattle data. Highly accurate phenotypes based on daughter performance and Illumina BovineHD Beadchip genotypes were available for 5503 Holstein Friesian bulls. The BovineHD genotypes (631,428 SNPs) of each bull were used to impute whole-genome sequence genotypes (12,590,056 SNPs) using the Beagle software. Imputation was done using a multi-breed reference panel of 429 sequenced individuals. Genomic estimated breeding values for three traits were predicted using a Bayesian stochastic search variable selection (BSSVS) model and a genome-enabled best linear unbiased prediction model (GBLUP). Reliabilities of predictions were based on 2087 validation bulls, while the other 3416 bulls were used for training. Prediction reliabilities ranged from 0.37 to 0.52. BSSVS performed better than GBLUP in all cases. Reliabilities of genomic predictions were slightly lower with imputed sequence data than with BovineHD chip data. Also, the reliabilities tended to be lower for both sequence data and BovineHD chip data when relationships between training animals were low. No increase in persistency of prediction reliability using imputed sequence data was observed. Compared to BovineHD genotype data, using imputed sequence data for genomic prediction produced no advantage. To investigate the putative advantage of genomic prediction using (imputed) sequence data, a training set with a larger number of individuals that are distantly related to each other and genomic prediction models that incorporate biological information on the SNPs or that apply stricter SNP pre-selection should be considered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Brazil 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 122 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 24%
Researcher 23 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 10%
Student > Master 13 10%
Other 8 6%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 25 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 84 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 3%
Mathematics 1 <1%
Physics and Astronomy 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 27 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genetics Selection Evolution
#667
of 822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,672
of 283,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics Selection Evolution
#11
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 822 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.