The aim of this study was to assess the contribution of the weighted single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (wssGBLUP) method compared to the single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) method for genomic evaluation of 25 linear-type traits in the Czech Holstein cattle population. The nationwide database of linear-type traits with 6,99,681 records combined with deregressed proofs from Interbull (MACE method) was used as the input data. Genomic breeding values (GEBVs) were predicted based on these phenotypes using ssGBLUP and wssGBLUP methods using the BLUPF90 software. The bull validation test was employed which was based on comparing GEBVs of young bulls (N = 334) with no progeny in 2016. A minimum of 50 daughters with their own performance in 2020 was chosen to verify the contribution to the GEBV prediction, GEBV reliability, validation reliabilities (R2), and regression coefficients (b1). The results showed that the differences between the two methods were negligible. The low benefit of wssGBLUP may be due to the inclusion of a small number of SNPs; therefore, most predictions rely on polygenic relationships between animals. Nevertheless, the benefits of wssGBLUP analysis should be assessed with respect to specific population structures and given traits.

Animal breeding is based on statistical and mathematical approaches. With the development of computer technology, these procedures have become more efficient and have shed light upon an increasing amount of information, particularly in the field of molecular genetics. This results in a more accurate prediction of the breeding value. The single-step approach is the most popular genomic breeding value-prediction method. Single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) assumes that all single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) explain the same fraction of genetic variance. In contrast, unequal variance and SNP weights were considered in weighted ssGBLUP (wssGBLUP). The aim of this study was to assess the contribution of wssGBLUP compared to ssGBLUP for the genomic evaluation of 25 linear-type traits in Czech Holstein cattle. We can conclude that no significant differences were found between these methods for the evaluated traits, probably because of the low number of included SNPs, which may not cover all significant SNPs in the genome.

Czech Moravian Breeders' Corporation Hradištko 252 09 Czech Republic

Department of Animal and Dairy Science University of Georgia Athens GA USA

Department of Genetics and Breeding of Farm Animals Institute of Animal Science Prague Uhříněves 104 00 Czech Republic

See more in PubMed

Abdalla, I. M., Lu X., Nazar M., Arbab A. A. I., Xu T., Yousif M. H., Mao Y., and Yang Z.. . 2021. Genome-wide association study identifies candidate genes associated with feet and leg conformation traits in Chinese Holstein cattle. Animals 11:2259. doi:10.3390/ani11082259 PubMed DOI PMC

Abo-Ismail, M. K., Brito L. F., Miller S. P., Sargolzaei M., Grossi D. A., Moore S. S., Plastow G., Stothard P., Nayeri S., and Schenkel F. S.. . 2017. Genome-wide association studies and genomic prediction of breeding values for calving performance and body conformation traits in Holstein cattle. Genet. Sel. Evol. 49:82. doi:10.1186/s12711-017-0356-8 PubMed DOI PMC

Andonov, S., Lourenco D. A. L., Fragomeni B. O., Masuda Y., Pocrnic I., Tsuruta S., and Misztal I.. . 2017. Accuracy of breeding values in small genotyped populations using different sources of external information—a simulation study. J. Dairy Sci. 100:395–401. doi:10.3168/jds.2016-11335 PubMed DOI

Atashi, H., Salavati M., De Koster J. D., Crowe M. A., Opsomer G., and Hosteins M.; The GplusE Consortium. 2020. A genome-wide association study for calving interval in Holstein dairy cows using weighted single-step genomic BLUP approach. Animals. 10:500. doi:10.3390/ani10030500 PubMed DOI PMC

Bauer, J., Přibyl J., and Vostrý L.. . 2015. Reliability of single-step genomic BLUP breeding values by multi-trait test-day model analysis. J. Dairy Sci. 98:4999–5003. doi:10.3168/jds.2015-9371 PubMed DOI

Blasco, A., and Toro M. A.. . 2014. A short critical history of the application of genomics to animal breeding. Livest. Sci. 166:4–9. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2014.03.015 DOI

Bouwman, A. C., Daetwyler H. D., Chamberlain A. J., Ponce C. H., Sargolzaei M., Schenkel F. S., Sahana G., Govignon-Gion A., Boitard S., Dolezal M., . et al.. 2018. Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for cattle stature identifies common genes that regulate body size in mammals. Nat. Genet. 50:362–367. doi:10.1038/s41588-018-0056-5 PubMed DOI

Buaban, S., Lengnudum K., Boonkum W., and Phakdeedindam P.. . 2020. Genome-wide association study on milk production and somatic cell score for Thai dairy cattle using weighted single-step approach with random regression test-day model. J. Dairy Sci. 105:468–494. doi:10.3168/jds.2020-19826 PubMed DOI

Cesarani, A., Garcia A., Hidalgo J., Degano L., Vicario D., Macciotta N. P. P., and Lourenco D.. . 2020. Genomic information allows for more accurate breeding values for milkability in dual-purpose Italian Simmental cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 104:5719–5727. doi:10.3168/jds.2020-19838 PubMed DOI

ČMSCH. 2020. Breeding value prediction methodology for linear type traits. Available from https://www.cmsch.cz/CMSCH.cz/media/lib_Plemdat/Popis_exterier.pdf [accessed August 23, 2022].

Chang, L. Y., Toghiani S., Aggrey S. E., and Rekaya R.. . 2019. Increasing accuracy of genomic selection in presence of high density marker panels through the prioritization of relevant polymorphisms. BMC Genet. 20:21. doi:10.1186/s12863-019-0720-5 PubMed DOI PMC

Christensen, O. F., and Lund M. S.. . 2010. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genet. Sel. Evol. 42:2. doi:10.1186/1297-9686-42-2 PubMed DOI PMC

Fragomeni, B. O., Lourenco D. A. L., Legarra A., VanRaden P. M., and Misztal I.. . 2019. Alternative SNP weighting for single-step genomic best linear unbiased predictor evaluation of stature in US holsteins in the presence of selected sequence variants. J. Dairy Sci. 102:10012–10019. doi:10.3168/jds.2019-16262 PubMed DOI

Fragomeni, B. O., Lourenco D. A. L., Masuda Y., Legarra A., and Misztal I.. . 2017. Incorporation of causative quantitative trait nucleotides in single-step GBLUP. Genet. Sel. Evol. 49:59. doi:10.1186/s12711-017-0335-0 PubMed DOI PMC

GMACE. 2019. GMACE methodology. Available from https://interbull.org/ib/gmace_ref [accessed August 17, 2022].

Holstein Cattle Breeders Association of the Czech Republic. 2009. Linear-type trait genetic evaluation of Holstein cattle. Available from https://www.holstein.cz/cz/soubory-ke-stazeni/metodiky/60-metodika-linearniho-popisu/file [accessed July 4, 2022].

Ismael, H., Janković D., Stanojević D., Bogdanović V., Trivunović S., and Djedović R.. . 2021. Estimation of heritability and genetic correlations between milk yield and linear type traits in Primiparous Holstein-Friesian cows. Rev. Bras. de Zootec. 50:e20200121. doi:10.37496/rbz5020200121 DOI

Interbull. 2022. Interbull centre. Available from https://interbull.org/index [accessed August 17, 2022].

Iung, L. H. S., Petrini J., Ramírez-Díaz J., Salvian M., Rovadoscki G. A., Pilonetto F., Dauria B. D., Machado P. F., Coutinho L. L., Wiggans G. R., . et al.. 2019. Genome-wide association study for milk production traits in a Brazilian Holstein population. J. Dairy Sci. 102:5305–5314. doi:10.3168/jds.2018-14811 PubMed DOI

James, C., Pemberton J. M., Navarro P., and Knott S.. . 2022. The impact of SNP density on quantitative genetic analyses of body size traits in a wild population of Soay sheep. bioRxiv doi:10.1101/2022.03.07.483376 PubMed DOI PMC

Jiang, J., Ma L., Prakapenka D., VanRaden P. M., Cole J. B., and Da Y.. . 2019. A large-scale genome-wide association study in U.S. Holstein cattle. Front. Genet. 10:412. doi:10.3389/fgene.2019.00412 PubMed DOI PMC

Koivula, M., Strandén I., Aamand G. P., and Mäntysaari E. A.. . 2016. Effect of cow reference group on validation reliability of genomic evaluation. Animal. 10:1061–1066. doi:10.1017/S1751731115002864. PubMed DOI

Koivula, M., Strandén I., Aamand G. P., and Mäntysaari E. A.. . 2017. Validation of genomic and genetic evaluations in 305d production traits of Nordic Holstein cattle. Interbull Bull. 51:29–32.

Koivula, M., Strandén I., Su G., and Mäntysaari E. A.. . 2012. Different methods to calculate genomic predictions—comparisons of BLUP at the single nucleotide polymorphism level (SNP-BLUP), BLUP at the individual level (G-BLUP), and the one-step approach (H-BLUP). J. Dairy Sci. 95:4065–4073. doi:10.3168/jds.2011-4874 PubMed DOI

Legarra, A., Christensen O. F., Aguilar I., and Misztal I.. . 2014. Single Step, a general approach for genomic selection. Livest. Sci. 166:54–65. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2014.04.029 DOI

Lopez, B. I. M., An N., Srikanth K., Lee S., Oh J.-D., Shin D.-H., Park W., Chai H.-H., Park J.-E., and Lim D.. . 2021. Genomic prediction based on SNP functional annotation using imputed whole-genome sequence data in Korean Hanwoo cattle. Front. Genet. 11:603822. doi:10.3389/fgene.2020.603822 PubMed DOI PMC

Lourenco, D. A. L., Fragomeni B. O., Bradford H. L., Menezes I. R., Ferraz J. B. S., Aguilar I., Tsuruta S., and Misztal I.. . 2017. Implications of SNP weighting on single-step genomic predictions for different reference population sizes. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 134:463–471. doi:10.1111/jbg.12288 PubMed DOI

Lourenco, D., Legarra A., Tsuruta S., Masuda Y., Aguilar I., and Misztal I.. . 2020. Single-step genomic evaluations from theory to practice: using SNP chips and sequence data in BLUPF90. Genes. 11:790. doi:10.3390/genes11070790 PubMed DOI PMC

Lu, S., Liu Y., Yu X., Li Y., Yang Y., Wei M., Zhou Q., Wang J., Zhang Y., Zheng W., . et al.. 2020. Prediction of genomic breeding values based on pre-selected SNPs using ssGBLUP, WssGBLUP and BayesB for Edwardsiellosis resistance in Japanese flounder. Genet. Sel. Evol. 52:49. doi:10.1186/s12711-020-00566-2 PubMed DOI PMC

Mäntysaari, E. A., and Koivula M.. . 2012. GEBV validation test revisited. Interbull Bull. 45:1–5.

Mäntysaari, E. A., Liu Z., and VanRaden P.. . 2010. Interbull validation test for genomic evaluations. Interbull Bull. 41:17–22.

Meuwissen, T. H. E., Hayes B. J., and Goddard M. E.. . 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics. 157:1819–1829. doi:10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819 PubMed DOI PMC

Misztal, I., Legarra A., and Aguilar I.. . 2009. Computing procedures for genetic evaluation including phenotypic, full pedigree, and genomic information. J. Dairy Sci. 92:4648–4655. doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2064 PubMed DOI

Misztal, I., Tsuruta S., Aguilar I., Legarra A., VanRaden P. M., and Lawlor T. J.. . 2013. Methods to approximate reliabilities in single-step genomic evaluation. J. Dairy Sci. 96:647–654. doi:10.3168/jds.2012-5656 PubMed DOI

Misztal, I., Tsuruta S., Lourenco D., Aguilar I., Legarra A., and Vitezica Z.. . 2014. Manual for BLUPF90 family of programs. https://nce.ads.uga.edu/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=blupf90_all2.pdf [accessed 15 September, 2022]

National genomic evaluations. 2021. National genomic evaluation forms provided by countries. Available from https://interbull.org/ib/nationalgenoforms [accessed July 24, 2022]

Přibyl, J., Madsen P., Bauer J., Přibylová J., Simečková M., Vostrý L., and Zavadilová L.. . 2013. Contribution of domestic production records, Interbull estimated breeding values, and single nucleotide polymorphism genetic markers to the single-step genomic evaluation of milk production. J. Dairy Sci. 96:1865–1873. doi:10.3168/jds.2012-6157 PubMed DOI

Přibyl, J., Bauer J., Pešek P., Přibylová J., Vostrý L., and Zavadilová L.. . 2014. Domestic and Interbull information in the single step genomic evaluation of Holstein milk production. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 59:409–415. doi:10.17221/7652-cjas DOI

Teissier, M., Larroque H., and Robert-Granié C.. . 2018. Weighted single-step genomic BLUP improves accuracy of genomic breeding values for protein content in French dairy goats: a quantitative trait influenced by a major gene. Genet. Sel. Evol. 50:31. doi:10.1186/s12711-018-0400-3 PubMed DOI PMC

Tsuruta, S., Lourenco D., Masuda Y., Moser D. W., and Misztal I.. . 2016. Practical approximation of accuracy in genomic breeding values for a large number of genotyped animals. J. Anim. Sci. 94:162–162. doi:10.2527/jam2016-0337 DOI

Vandenplas, J., Spehar M., Potocnik K., Gengler N., and Gorjanc G.. . 2017. National single-step genomic method that integrates multi-national genomic information. J. Dairy Sci. 100:465–478. doi:10.3168/jds.2016-11733 PubMed DOI

VanRaden, P. M. 2008. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J. Dairy Sci. 91:4414–4423. doi:10.3168/jds.2007-0980 PubMed DOI

Viana, J. M. S., Piepho H. -P., and Silva F. F.. . 2017. Quantitative genetics theory for genomic selection and efficiency of genotypic value prediction in open-pollinated populations. Sci. Agric. 74:41–50. doi:10.1590/1678-992X-2015-0479 DOI

Wang, H., Misztal I., Aguilar I., Legarra A., and Muir W. M.. . 2012. Genome-wide association mapping including phenotypes from relatives without genotypes. Genet. Res. 94:73–83. doi:10.1017/s0016672312000274 PubMed DOI

Won, S., Park J.-E., Son J.-H., Lee S.-H., Park P. H., Park M., Park W.-C., Chai H.-H., Kim H., Lee J., . et al.. 2020. Genomic prediction accuracy using haplotypes defined by size and hierarchival clustering based on linkage disequilibrium. Front. Genet. 11:134. doi:10.3389/fgene.2020.00134 PubMed DOI PMC

Wientjes, Y. C. J., Veerkamp R. F., and Calus M. P. L.. . 2013. The effect of linkage disequilibrium and family relationships on the reliability of genomic prediction. Genetics. 193:621–631. doi:10.1534/genetics.112.146290 PubMed DOI PMC

Wu, X., Fang M., Liu L., Wang S., Liu J., Ding X., Zhang S., Zhang Q., Zhang Y., Qiao L., . et al.. 2013. Genome wide association studies for body conformation traits in the Chinese Holstein cattle population. BMC Genomics. 14:897. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-14-897 PubMed DOI PMC

Zavadilova, L., Pribyl J., Vostry L., and Bauer J.. . 2014. Single-step genomic evaluation for linear type traits of Holstein cows in Czech Republic. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 32:201–208.

Zhang, X., Lourenco D., Aguilar I., Legarra A., and Misztal I.. . 2016. Weighting strategies for single-step genomic BLUP: an iterative approach for accurate calculation of GEBV and GWAS. Front. Genet. 7:151. doi:10.3389/fgene.2016.00151 PubMed DOI PMC

Zhang, H., Yin L., Wang M., Yuan X., and Liu X.. . 2019. Factors affecting the accuracy of genomic selection for agricultural economic traits in maize, cattle, and pig populations. Front. Genet. 10:189. doi:10.3389/fgene.2019.00189 PubMed DOI PMC