The open-pollinated (OP) family testing combines the simplest known progeny evaluation and quantitative genetics analyses as candidates' offspring are assumed to represent independent half-sib families. The accuracy of genetic parameter estimates is often questioned as the assumption of "half-sibling" in OP families may often be violated. We compared the pedigree- vs. marker-based genetic models by analysing 22-yr height and 30-yr wood density for 214 white spruce [Picea glauca (Moench) Voss] OP families represented by 1694 individuals growing on one site in Quebec, Canada. Assuming half-sibling, the pedigree-based model was limited to estimating the additive genetic variances which, in turn, were grossly overestimated as they were confounded by very minor dominance and major additive-by-additive epistatic genetic variances. In contrast, the implemented genomic pairwise realized relationship models allowed the disentanglement of additive from all nonadditive factors through genetic variance decomposition. The marker-based models produced more realistic narrow-sense heritability estimates and, for the first time, allowed estimating the dominance and epistatic genetic variances from OP testing. In addition, the genomic models showed better prediction accuracies compared to pedigree models and were able to predict individual breeding values for new individuals from untested families, which was not possible using the pedigree-based model. Clearly, the use of marker-based relationship approach is effective in estimating the quantitative genetic parameters of complex traits even under simple and shallow pedigree structure.

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Oklahoma State University Stillwater Oklahoma 74078

Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences Faculty of Forestry University of British Columbia Vancouver V6T 1Z4 Canada

Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences Faculty of Forestry University of British Columbia Vancouver V6T 1Z4 Canada Department of Genetics and Physiology of Forest Trees Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences Czech University of Life Sciences Prague 165 21 Praha 6 Czech Republic

Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences Faculty of Forestry University of British Columbia Vancouver V6T 1Z4 Canada Pharmacognosy Department Faculty of Pharmacy Alexandria University 21521 Egypt

See more in PubMed

Askew G. R., El-Kassaby Y. A., 1994.  Estimation of relationship coefficients among progeny derived from wind-pollinated orchard seeds. Theor. Appl. Genet. 88: 267–272. PubMed

Avendano S., Woolliams J. A., Villanueva B., 2004.  Mendelian sampling terms as a selective advantage in optimum breeding schemes with restrictions on the rate of inbreeding. Genet. Res. 83: 55–64. PubMed

Baird N. A., Etter P. D., Atwood T. S., Currey M. C., Shiver A. L., et al. , 2008.  Rapid SNP discovery and genetic mapping using sequenced RAD markers. PLoS One 3: e3376. PubMed PMC

Beaulieu J., Doerksen T., Boyle B., Clément S., Deslauriers M., et al. , 2011.  Association genetics of wood physical traits in the conifer white spruce and relationships with gene expression. Genetics 188: 197–214. PubMed PMC

Beaulieu J., Doerksen T., Clément S., Mackay J., Bousquet J., 2014.  Accuracy of genomic selection models in a large population of open-pollinated families in white spruce. Heredity 113: 343–352. PubMed PMC

Bradshaw H. D., Jr, Foster G. S., 1992.  Marker-aided selection and propagation system in trees: advantages of cloning for studying quantitative inheritance. Can. J. For. Res. 22: 1044–1049.

Burdon R. D., Shelbourne C. J. A., 1971.  Breeding populations for recurrent selection: conflicts and possible solutions. N. Z. J. For. Sci. 1: 174–193.

Callaham R. Z., 1964.  Provenance research: investigation of genetic diversity associated with geography. Unasylva 18: 40–50.

Chen C., Mitchell S. E., Elshire R. J., Buckler E. S., El-Kassaby Y. A., 2013.  Mining conifers’ mega-genome using rapid and efficient multiplexed high-throughput genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) SNP discovery platform. Tree Genet. Genomes 9: 1537–1544.

Costa E., Silva J., Borralho N. M. G., Botts B. M., 2009.  Additive and non-additive genetic parameters from clonally replicated and seedling progenies of Eucalyptus globulus. Theor. Appl. Genet. 108: 1113–1119. PubMed

Crow J. F., 2008.  Maintaining evolvability. J. Genet. 87: 349–353. PubMed

Crow J. F., 2010.  On epistasis: why it is unimportant in polygenic directional selection. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B. 365: 1241–1244. PubMed PMC

El-Kassaby Y. A., 1993.  Evaluation of the tree-improvement delivery system: factors affecting genetic potential. Tree Physiol. 15: 545–550. PubMed

El-Kassaby Y. A., Barclay H. J., 1992.  Cost of reproduction in Douglas-fir. Can. J. Bot. 70: 1429–1432.

El-Kassaby Y. A., Sziklai O., 1982.  Genetic variation of allozyme and quantitative traits in a selected Douglas-fir [Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii (Mirb.) Franco] population. For. Ecol. Manage. 4: 115–126.

El-Kassaby Y. A., Fashler A. M. K., Sziklai O., 1984.  Reproductive phenology and its impact on genetically improved seed production in a Douglas-fir seed orchard. Silvae Genet. 33: 120–125.

El-Kassaby Y. A., Fashler A. M. K., Crown M., 1989.  Variation in fruitfulness in a Douglas-fir seed orchard and its effect on crop-management decisions. Silvae Genet. 38: 113–121.

El-Kassaby Y. A., Klápště J., Guy R. D., 2012.  Breeding without breeding: selection using the genomic best linear unbiased predictor method (GBLUP). New For. 43: 631–637.

Elshire R. J., Glaubitz J. C., Sun Q., Poland J. A., Kawamoto K., et al. , 2011.  A robust, simple genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach for high diversity species. PLoS One 6: e19379. PubMed PMC

Foster G. S., Shaw D. V., 1988.  Using clonal replications to explore genetic variation in a perennial plant species. Theor. Appl. Genet. 76: 788–794. PubMed

Frentiu F. D., Clegg S. M., Chittock J., Burke T., Blows M. W., et al. , 2008.  Pedigree-free animal models: the relatedness matrix reloaded. P. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 275: 639–647. PubMed PMC

Gamal El-Dien O., Ratcliffe B., Klápště J., Chen C., Porth I., et al. , 2015.  Prediction accuracies for growth and wood attributes of interior spruce in space using genotyping-by-sequencing. BMC Genomics 16: 370. PubMed PMC

Gay L., Siol M., Ronfort J., 2013.  Pedigree-free estimates of heritability in the wild: promising prospects for selfing populations. PLoS One 8: e66983. PubMed PMC

Gilmour A. R., Thompson R., Cullis B. R., 1995.  Average information REML: an efficient algorithm for variance parameter estimation in linear mixed models. Biometrics 51: 1440–1450.

Gilmour A. R., Gogel B., Cullis B., Thompson R., 2009.  ASReml User Guide Release 3.0, VSN International Ltd, Hemel Hempstead, UK.

Habier D., Fernando R. L., Dekkers J. C. M., 2007.  The impact of genetic relationship information on genome-assisted breeding values. Genetics 177: 2389–2397. PubMed PMC

Habier D., Tetens J., Seefried F. R., Lichtner P., Thaller G., 2010.  The impact of genetic relationship information on genomic breeding values in German Holstein cattle. Genet. Sel. Evol. 42: 5. PubMed PMC

Habier D., Fernando R. L., Garrick D. J., 2013.  Genomic BLUP decoded: a look into the black box of genomic prediction. Genetics 194: 597–607. PubMed PMC

Hallingback H. R., Jansson G., 2013.  Genetic information from progeny trials: a comparison between progenies generated by open pollination and by controlled crosses. Tree Genet. Genomes 9: 731–740.

Hayes B. J., Visscher P. M., Goddard M. E., 2009.  Increased accuracy of artificial selection by using the realized relationship matrix. Genet. Res. 91: 47–60. PubMed

Henderson C. R., 1975.  Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31: 423–447. PubMed

Henderson C. R., 1976.  Simple method for computing inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in prediction of breeding values. Biometrics 32: 69–83.

Henderson C. R., 1984.  Applications of Linear Models in Animal Breeding. University of Guelph, Ontario.

Hill W. G., Goddard M. E., Visscher P. M., 2008.  Data and theory point to mainly additive genetic variance for complex traits. PLoS Genet. 4: e1000008. PubMed PMC

Hill W. G., Weir B. S., 2011.  Variation in actual relationship as a consequence of Mendelian sampling and linkage. Genetics 93: 47–64. PubMed PMC

Jannink J. L., 2007.  Identifying quantitative trait locus by genetic background interactions in association studies. Genetics 176: 553–561. PubMed PMC

Jayawickrama K. J. S., Carson M. J., 2000.  A breeding strategy for the New Zealand radiata pine breeding cooperative. Silvae Genet. 49: 82–90.

Johnson G. R., 1997.  Site-to-site genetic correlations and their implications on breeding zone size and optimum number of progeny test sites for coastal Douglas-fir. Silvae Genet. 46: 280–285.

Kiss G. K., Yanchuk A. D., 1991.  Preliminary evaluation of genetic variation of weevil resistance in interior spruce in British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 21: 230–234.

Klápště J., Lstibůrek M., El-Kassaby Y. A., 2014.  Estimates of genetic parameters and breeding values from western larch open-pollinated families using marker-based relationship. Tree Genet. Genomes 10: 241–249.

Korecky J., Klápště J., Lstibůrek M., Kobliha J., Dana Nelson C., et al. , 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: 1227–1235.

Lee S. H., Goddard M. E., Visscher P. M., van der Werf J. H. J., 2010.  Using the realized relationship matrix to disentangle confounding factors for the estimation of genetic variance components of complex traits. Genet. Sel. Evol. 42: 22. PubMed PMC

Lippert C., Quon G., Kang E. Y., Kadie C. M., Listgarten J., et al. , 2013.  The benefits of selecting phenotype-specific variants for applications of mixed models in genomics. Sci. Rep. 3: 1815. PubMed PMC

Loberg A., Durr J. W., Fikse W. F., Jorjani H., Crooks L., 2015.  Estimates of genetic variance and variance of predicted genetic merits using pedigree or genomic relationship matrices in six Brown Swiss cattle populations for different traits. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 10.1111/jbg.12142 PubMed DOI

Lynch M., Walsh B., 1998.  Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.

Mackay T. F. C., 2014.  Epistasis and quantitative traits: using model organisms to study gene-gene interactions. Nat. Rev. Genet. 15: 22–33. PubMed PMC

Mrode R. A., 2014.  Linear Models for the Prediction of Animal Breeding Values. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxfordshire.

Muñoz P. R., Resende M. F. R., Jr, Gezan S. A., Resende M. D. V., de los Campos G., et al. , 2014.  Unraveling additive from nonadditive effects using genomic relationship matrices. Genetics 198: 1759–1768. PubMed PMC

Namkoong G., 1966.  Inbreeding effects on estimation of genetic additive variance. For. Sci. 12: 8–13.

Namkoong G., Kang H. C., Brouard J. S., 1988. Tree Breeding: Principles and Strategies. Monographs on Theoretical and Applied Genetics. Springer, New York.

Peterson B. K., Weber J. N., Kay E. H., Fisher H. S., Hoekstra H. E., 2012.  Double digest RADseq: an inexpensive method for de novo SNP discovery and genotyping in model and non-model species. PLoS One 7: e37135. PubMed PMC

Poland J., Endelman J., Dawson J., Rutkoski J., Wu S., et al. , 2012.  Genomic selection in wheat breeding using genotyping-by-sequencing. Plant Genome 5: 103–113.

Porth I., Klápště J., Skyba O., Lai B. S. K., Geraldes A., et al. , 2013.  Populus trichocarpa cell wall chemistry and ultrastructure trait variation, genetic control and genetic correlations. New Phytol. 197: 777–790. PubMed

Ratcliffe B., Hart F. J., Klápště J., Jaquish B., Mansfield S. D., et al. , 2014.  Genetics of wood quality attributes in western larch. Ann. For. Sci. 71: 415–424.

Ratcliffe B., Gamal El-Dien O., Klápště J., Porth I., Chen C., et al. , 2015.  A comparison of genomic selection models across time in interior spruce (Picea engelmannii x glauca) using unordered SNP imputation methods. Heredity 115: 547–555 10.1038/hdy.2015.57. PubMed DOI PMC

Rigault P., Boyle B., Lepage P., Cooke J. E. K., Bousquet J., et al. , 2011.  A white spruce gene catalog for conifer genome analyses. Plant Physiol. 193(157): 14–28. PubMed PMC

Santure A. W., Syapley J., Ball A. D., Birkhead T. I. M. R., Burke T., et al. , 2010.  On the use of large marker panels to estimate inbreeding and relatedness: empirical and simulation studies of a pedigreed zebra finch population types at 771 SNPs. Mol. Ecol. 19: 1439–1451. PubMed

Squillace A. E., 1974.  Average genetic correlations among offspring from open-pollinated forest trees. Silvae Genet. 23: 149–156.

Su G., Christensen O. F., Ostersen T., Henryon M., Lund M. S., 2012.  Estimating additive and non-additive genetic variances and predicting genetic merits using genome-wide dense single nucleotide polymorphism markers. PLoS One 7: e45293. PubMed PMC

Thomas S. C., Coltman D. W., Pemberton J. M., 2002.  The use of marker-based relationship information to estimate the heritability of body weight in a natural population: a cautionary tale. J. Evol. Biol. 15: 92–99.

Truong H. T., Ramos A. M., Yalcin F., de Ruiter M., van der Poel H. J. A., et al. , 2012.  Sequence-based genotyping for marker discovery and co-dominant scoring in germplasm and populations. PLoS One 7: e37565. PubMed PMC

VanRaden P. M., 2008.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J. Dairy Sci. 91: 4414–4423. PubMed

Visscher P. M., Medland S. E., Ferreira M. A. R., Morley K. I., Zhu G., et al. , 2006.  Assumption-free estimation of heritability from genome-wide identity-by-descent sharing between full siblings. PLoS Genet. 2: e41. PubMed PMC

Vitezica Z. G., Varona L., Legarra A., 2013.  On the additive and dominance and covariance of individuals within the genomic selection scope. Genetics 195: 1223–1230. PubMed PMC

Wright S., 1922.  Coefficients of inbreeding and relationship. Am. Nat. 56: 330–338.

Zapata-Valenzuela J., Whetten R. W., Neale D., McKeand S., Isik F., 2013.  Genomic estimated breeding values using genomic relationship matrices in a cloned population of loblolly pine. G3 Genes Genom. Genet. 3: 909–916. PubMed PMC

In Situ Genetic Evaluation of European Larch Across Climatic Regions Using Marker-Based Pedigree Reconstruction

Multienvironment genomic variance decomposition analysis of open-pollinated Interior spruce (Picea glauca x engelmannii)

Dynamic Gene-Resource Landscape Management of Norway Spruce: Combining Utilization and Conservation

Single-Step BLUP with Varying Genotyping Effort in Open-Pollinated Picea glauca