Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T06:21:59.590Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Imputation of non-genotyped sheep from the genotypes of their mates and resulting progeny

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2017

D. P. Berry ,
N. McHugh ,
S. Randles ,
E. Wall ,
K. McDermott ,
M. Sargolzaei  and
A. C. O’Brien
D. P. Berry*
Affiliation:
Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
N. McHugh
Affiliation:
Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
S. Randles
Affiliation:
Sheep Ireland, Highfield House, Shinagh, Bandon, Co. Cork, Ireland
E. Wall
Affiliation:
Sheep Ireland, Highfield House, Shinagh, Bandon, Co. Cork, Ireland
K. McDermott
Affiliation:
Sheep Ireland, Highfield House, Shinagh, Bandon, Co. Cork, Ireland
M. Sargolzaei
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Improvement of Livestock, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1 Semex Alliance, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1H 6J2
A. C. O’Brien
Affiliation:
Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
*
†E-mail: Donagh.berry@teagasc.ie
Get access

Abstract

Accurate genomic analyses are predicated on access to a large quantity of accurately genotyped and phenotyped animals. Because the cost of genotyping is often less than the cost of phenotyping, interest is increasing in generating genotypes for phenotyped animals. In some instances this may imply the requirement to genotype older animals with greater phenotypic information content. Biological material for these older informative animals may, however, no longer exist. The objective of the present study was to quantify the ability to impute 11 129 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes of non-genotyped animals (in this instance sires) from the genotypes of their progeny with or without including the genotypes of the progenys’ dams (i.e. mates of the sire to be imputed). The impact on the accuracy of genotype imputation by including more progeny (and their dams’) genotypes in the imputation reference population was also quantified. When genotypes of the dams were not available, genotypes of 41 sires with at least 15 genotyped progeny were used for the imputation; when genotypes of the dams were available, genotypes of 21 sires with at least 10 genotyped progeny were used for the imputation. Imputation was undertaken exploiting family and population level information. The mean and variability in the proportion of genotypes per individual that could not be imputed reduced as the number of progeny genotypes used per individual increased. Little improvement in the proportion of genotypes that could not be imputed was achieved once genotypes of seven progeny and their dams were used or genotypes of 11 progeny without their respective dam’s genotypes were used. Mean imputation accuracy per individual (depicted by both concordance rates and correlation between true and imputed) increased with increasing progeny group size. Moreover, the range in mean imputation accuracy per individual reduced as more progeny genotypes were used in the imputation. If the genotype of the mate of the sire was also used, high accuracy of imputation (mean genotype concordance rate per individual of 0.988), with little additional benefit thereafter, was achieved with seven genotyped progeny. In the absence of genotypes on the dam, similar imputation accuracy could not be achieved even using genotypes on up to 15 progeny. Results therefore suggest, at least for the SNP density used in the present study, that it is possible to accurately impute the genotypes of a non-genotyped parent from the genotypes of its progeny and there is a benefit of also including the genotype of the sire’s mate (i.e. dam of the progeny).

Keywords

single nucleotide polymorphismFImputeimputeparent
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , February 2018 , pp. 191 - 198
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguilar, I, Misztal, I, Johnson, DL, Legarra, A, Tsuruta, S and Lawlor, TJ 2010. Hot topic: a unified approach to utilize phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information for genetic evaluation of Holstein final score. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 743–752.Google Scholar
Berry, DP, Garcia, JF and Garrick, DJ 2016. Development and implementation of genomic predictions in beef cattle. Animal Frontiers 6, 32–38.Google Scholar
Berry, DP and Kearney, JF 2011. Imputation of genotypes from low-to high-density genotyping platforms and implications for genomic selection. Animal 5, 1162–1169.Google Scholar
Berry, DP, McParland, S, Kearney, JF, Sargolzaei, M and Mullen, MP 2014. Imputation of ungenotyped parental genotypes in dairy and beef cattle from progeny genotypes. Animal 8, 895–903.Google Scholar
Bolormaa, S, Gore, K, van der Werf, JHJ, Hayes, BJ and Daetwyler, HD 2015. Design of a low-density SNP chip for the main Australian sheep breeds and its effect on imputation and genomic prediction accuracy. Animal Genetics 46, 544–556.Google Scholar
Boison, SA, Neves, HHR, Pérez O’Brien, AM, Utsunomiya, YT, Carvalheiro, R, da Silvac, MVGB, Sölkner, J and Garcia, JF 2014. Imputation of non-genotyped individuals using genotyped progeny in Nellore, a Bos indicus cattle breed. Livestock Science 166, 176–189.Google Scholar
Bouwman, AC, Hickey, JM, Calus, MPL and Veerkamp, RF 2014. Imputation of non-genotyped individuals based on genotyped relatives: assessing the imputation accuracy of a real case scenario in dairy cattle. Genetics Selection Evolution 46, 6.Google Scholar
Calus, MP, Bouwman, AC, Hickey, JM, Veerkamp, RF and Mulder, HA 2014. Evaluation of measures of correctness of genotype imputation in the context of genomic prediction: a review of livestock applications. Animal 8, 1743–1753.Google Scholar
Christensen, OF and Lund, MS 2010. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genetics Selection Evolution 42, 2.Google Scholar
Cromie, AR, Berry, DP, Wickham, B, Kearney, JF, Pena, J, van Kaam, JBCH, Gengler, N, Szyda, J, Schnyder, U, Coffey, M, Moster, B, Hagiya, K, Weller, JI, Abernethy, D and Spelman, R 2010. International Genomic Co-Operation; who, what, when, where, why and how? In InterBull Conference, Riga, Latvia, 31 May 2010, volume 42, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Daetwyler, HD, Villanueva, B and Woolliams, JA 2008. Accuracy of predicting the genetic risk of disease using a genome-wide approach. PLoS One 3, e3395.Google Scholar
Dassonneville, R, Brøndum, RF, Druet, T, Fritz, S, Guillaume, F, Guldbrandtsen, B, Lund, MS, Ducrocq, V and Su, G 2011. Effect of imputing markers from a low-density chip on the reliability of genomic breeding values in Holstein populations. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 3679–3686.Google Scholar
de Haas, Y, Pryce, JE, Calus, MPL, Wall, E, Berry, DP, Løvendahl, P, Krattenmacher, N, Miglior, F, Weigel, K, Spurlock, D, Macdonald, KA, Hulsegge, B and Veerkamp, RF 2015. Genomic prediction of dry matter intake in dairy cattle from an international data set consisting of research herds in Europe, North America, and Australasia. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 6522–6534.Google Scholar
García-Ruiz, A, Ruiz-Lopez, FJ, Wiggans, GR, Van Tassell, CP and Montaldo, HH 2015. Effect of reference population size and available ancestor genotypes on imputation of Mexican Holstein genotypes. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 3478–3484.Google Scholar
Hayes, BJ, Bowman, PJ, Chamberlain, AJ and Goddard, ME 2009. Invited review: genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 433–443.Google Scholar
Hayes, BJ, Bowman, PJ, Daetwyler, HD, Kijas, JW and van der Werf, JH 2012. Accuracy of genotype imputation in sheep breeds. Animal Genetics 43, 72–80.Google Scholar
Marchini, J and Howie, B 2010. Genotype imputation for genome-wide association studies. Nature Reviews Genetics 11, 499–511.Google Scholar
McParland, S, Kearney, JF, Rath, M and Berry, DP 2007. Inbreeding trends and pedigree analysis of Irish dairy and beef cattle populations. Journal of Animal Science 85, 322–331.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, THE, Hayes, BJ and Goddard, ME 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157, 1819–1829.Google Scholar
Mulder, HA, Calus, MPL, Druet, T and Schrooten, C 2012. Imputation of genotypes with low-density chips and its effect on reliability of direct genomic values in Dutch Holstein cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 876–889.Google Scholar
Norberg, E and Sørensen, AC 2007. Inbreeding trend and inbreeding depression in the Danish populations of Texel, Shropshire, and Oxford Down. Journal of Animal Science 85, 299–304.Google Scholar
Piccoli, ML, Braccini, J, Cardoso, FF, Sargolzaei, M, Larmer, SG and Schenkel, FS 2014. Accuracy of genome-wide imputation in Braford and Hereford beef cattle. BMC Genetics 15, 157.Google Scholar
Pszczola, M, Strabel, T, Mulder, HA and Calus, MPL 2012. Reliability of direct genomic values for animals with different relationships within and to the reference population. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 389–400.Google Scholar
Rupp, R, Mucha, S, Larroque, H, McEwan, J and Conington, J 2016. Genomic application in sheep and goat breeding. Animal Frontiers 6, 39–44.Google Scholar
Sargolzaei, M, Chesnais, JP and Schenkel, FS 2014. A new approach for efficient genotype imputation using information from relatives. BMC Genomics 15, 478.Google Scholar
VanRaden, PM, Null, DJ, Sargolzaei, M, Wiggans, GR, Tooker, ME, Cole, JB, Sonstegard, TS, Connor, EE, Winters, M, van Kaam, JB, Valentini, A, Van Doormaal, BJ, Faust, MA and Doak, GA 2013. Genomic imputation and evaluation using high-density Holstein genotypes. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 668–678.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, RF, Coffey, MP, Berry, DP, de Haas, Y, Strandberg, E, Bovenhuis, H, Calus, MPL and Wall, E 2012. Genome-wide associations for feed utilisation complex in primiparous Holstein-Fresian dairy cows from experimental research herds in four European countries. Animal 6, 1738–1749.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Berry supplementary material S1

Berry supplementary material

Download Berry supplementary material S1(File)
File 15.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Berry supplementary material S2

Berry supplementary material

Download Berry supplementary material S2(File)
File 158.6 KB