Genetic parameters that considered tolerance for heat stress were estimated for production, udder health, and milk composition traits. Data included 202,733 test-day records for milk, fat, and protein yields, fat and protein percentages, somatic cell score (SCS), 10 individual milk fatty acids (FA) predicted by mid-infrared spectrometry, and 7 FA groups. Data were from 34,468 first-lactation Holstein cows in 862 herds in the Walloon region of Belgium and were collected between 2007 and 2010. Test-day records were merged with daily temperature-humidity index (THI) values based on meteorological records from public weather stations. The maximum distance between each farm and its corresponding weather station was 21km. Linear reaction norm models were used to estimate the intercept and slope responses of 23 traits to increasing THI values. Most yield and FA traits had phenotypic and genetic declines as THI increased, whereas SCS, C18:0, C18:1 cis-9, and 4 FA groups (unsaturated FA, monounsaturated FA, polyunsaturated FA, and long-chain FA) increased with THI. Moreover, the latter traits had the largest slope-to-intercept genetic variance ratios, which indicate that they are more affected by heat stress at high THI levels. Estimates of genetic correlations within trait between cold and hot environments were generally high (>0.80). However, lower estimates (<=0.67) were found for SCS, fat yield, and C18:1 cis-9, indicating that animals with the highest genetic merit for those traits in cold environments do not necessarily have the highest genetic merit for the same traits in hot environments. Among all traits, C18:1 cis-9 was the most sensitive to heat stress. As this trait is known to reflect body reserve mobilization, using its variations under hot conditions could be a very affordable milk biomarker of heat stress for dairy cattle expressing the equilibrium between intake and mobilization under warm conditions.

BackgroundUse of whole-genome sequence data (WGS) is expected to improve identification of quantitative trait loci (QTL). However, this requires imputation to WGS, often with a limited number of sequenced animals for the target population. The objective of this study was to investigate imputation to WGS in two pig lines using a multi-line reference population and, subsequently, to investigate the effect of using these imputed WGS (iWGS) for GWAS.MethodsPhenotypes and genotypes were available on 12,184 Large White pigs (LW-line) and 4943 Dutch Landrace pigs (DL-line). Imputed 660 K and 80 K genotypes for the LW-line and DL-line, respectively, were imputed to iWGS using Beagle v.4.1. Since only 32 LW-line and 12 DL-line boars were sequenced, 142 animals from eight commercial lines were added. GWAS were performed for each line using the 80 K and 660 K SNPs, the genotype scores of iWGS SNPs that had an imputation accuracy (Beagle R2) higher than 0.6, and the dosage scores of all iWGS SNPs.ResultsFor the DL-line (LW-line), imputation of 80 K genotypes to iWGS resulted in an average Beagle R2 of 0.39 (0.49). After quality control, 2.5 × 106 (3.5 × 106) SNPs had a Beagle R2 higher than 0.6, resulting in an average Beagle R2 of 0.83 (0.93). Compared to the 80 K and 660 K genotypes, using iWGS led to the identification of 48.9 and 64.4% more QTL regions, for the DL-line and LW-line, respectively, and the most significant SNPs in the QTL regions explained a higher proportion of phenotypic variance. Using dosage instead of genotype scores improved the identification of QTL, because the model accounted for uncertainty of imputation, and all SNPs were used in the analysis.ConclusionsImputation to WGS using the multi-line reference population resulted in relatively poor imputation, especially when imputing from 80 K (DL-line). In spite of the poor imputation accuracies, using iWGS instead of a lower density SNP chip increased the number of detected QTL and the estimated proportion of phenotypic variance explained by these QTL, especially when dosage scores were used instead of genotype scores. Thus, iWGS, even with poor imputation accuracy, can be used to identify possible interesting regions for fine mapping.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12711-019-0445-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundFor some species, animal production systems are based on the use of crossbreeding to take advantage of the increased performance of crossbred compared to purebred animals. Effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) may differ between purebred and crossbred animals for several reasons: (1) differences in linkage disequilibrium between SNP alleles and a quantitative trait locus; (2) differences in genetic backgrounds (e.g., dominance and epistatic interactions); and (3) differences in environmental conditions, which result in genotype-by-environment interactions. Thus, SNP effects may be breed-specific, which has led to the development of genomic evaluations for crossbred performance that take such effects into account. However, to estimate breed-specific effects, it is necessary to know breed origin of alleles in crossbred animals. Therefore, our aim was to develop an approach for assigning breed origin to alleles of crossbred animals (termed BOA) without information on pedigree and to study its accuracy by considering various factors, including distance between breeds.ResultsThe BOA approach consists of: (1) phasing genotypes of purebred and crossbred animals; (2) assigning breed origin to phased haplotypes; and (3) assigning breed origin to alleles of crossbred animals based on a library of assigned haplotypes, the breed composition of crossbred animals, and their SNP genotypes. The accuracy of allele assignments was determined for simulated datasets that include crosses between closely-related, distantly-related and unrelated breeds. Across these scenarios, the percentage of alleles of a crossbred animal that were correctly assigned to their breed origin was greater than 90 %, and increased with increasing distance between breeds, while the percentage of incorrectly assigned alleles was always less than 2 %. For the remaining alleles, i.e. 0 to 10 % of all alleles of a crossbred animal, breed origin could not be assigned.ConclusionsThe BOA approach accurately assigns breed origin to alleles of crossbred animals, even if their pedigree is not recorded.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12711-016-0240-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundGenomic prediction of purebred animals for crossbred performance can be based on a model that estimates effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in purebreds on crossbred performance. For crossbred performance, SNP effects might be breed-specific due to differences between breeds in allele frequencies and linkage disequilibrium patterns between SNPs and quantitative trait loci. Accurately tracing the breed-of-origin of alleles (BOA) in three-way crosses is possible with a recently developed procedure called BOA. A model that accounts for breed-specific SNP effects (BOA model), has never been tested empirically on a three-way crossbreeding scheme. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to evaluate the estimates of variance components and the predictive accuracy of the BOA model compared to models in which SNP effects for crossbred performance were assumed to be the same across breeds, using either breed-specific allele frequencies ( model) or allele frequencies averaged across breeds ( model). In this study, we used data from purebred and three-way crossbred pigs on average daily gain (ADG), back fat thickness (BF), and loin depth (LD).ResultsEstimates of variance components for crossbred performance from the BOA model were mostly similar to estimates from models and . Heritabilities for crossbred performance ranged from 0.24 to 0.46 between traits. Genetic correlations between purebred and crossbred performance () across breeds ranged from 0.30 to 0.62 for ADG and from 0.53 to 0.74 for BF and LD. For ADG, prediction accuracies of the BOA model were higher than those of the and models, with significantly higher accuracies only for one maternal breed. For BF and LD, prediction accuracies of models and were higher than those of the BOA model, with no significant differences. Across all traits, models and yielded similar predictions.ConclusionsThe BOA model yielded a higher prediction accuracy for ADG in one maternal breed, which had the lowest (0.30). Using the BOA model was especially relevant for traits with a low . In all other cases, the use of crossbred information in models and , does not jeopardize predictions and these models are more easily implemented than the BOA model.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12711-017-0350-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Preselection of candidates, hereafter referred to as preselection, is a common practice in breeding programs. Preselection can cause bias and accuracy loss in subsequent pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP). However, the impact of preselection on subsequent single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) is not completely clear yet. Therefore, in this study, we investigated, across different heritabilities, the impact of intensity and type of preselection on subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation of preselected animals. Methods: We simulated a nucleus of a breeding programme, in which a recent population of 15 generations was produced with PBLUP-based selection. In generation 15 of this recent population, the parents of the next generation were preselected using several preselection scenarios. These scenarios were combinations of three intensities of preselection (no, high or very high preselection) and three types of preselection (genomic, parental average or random), across three heritabilities (0.5, 0.3 or 0.1). Following each preselection scenario, a subsequent evaluation was performed using ssGBLUP by excluding all the information from the preculled animals, and these genetic evaluations were compared in terms of accuracy and bias for the preselected animals, and in terms of realized genetic gain. Results: Type of preselection affected selection accuracy at both preselection and subsequent evaluation stages. While preselection accuracy decreased, accuracy in the subsequent ssGBLUP evaluation increased, from genomic to parent average to random preselection scenarios. Bias was always negligible. Genetic gain decreased from genomic to parent average to random preselection scenarios. Genetic gain also decreased with increasing intensity of preselection, but only by a maximum of 0.1 additive genetic standard deviation from no to very high genomic preselection scenarios. Conclusions: Using ssGBLUP in subsequent evaluations prevents preselection bias, irrespective of intensity and type of preselection, and heritability. With GPS, in addition to reducing the phenotyping effort considerably, the use of ssGBLUP in subsequent evaluations realizes only a slightly lower genetic gain than that realized without preselection. This is especially the case for traits that are expensive to measure (e.g. feed intake of individual broiler chickens), and traits for which phenotypes can only be measured at advanced stages of life (e.g. litter size in pigs).

Different methods are available to calculate multi-population genomic relationship matrices. Since those matrices differ in base population, it is anticipated that the method used to calculate genomic relationships affects the estimate of genetic variances, covariances, and correlations. The aim of this article is to define the multi-population genomic relationship matrix to estimate current genetic variances within and genetic correlations between populations. The genomic relationship matrix containing two populations consists of four blocks, one block for population 1, one block for population 2, and two blocks for relationships between the populations. It is known, based on literature, that by using current allele frequencies to calculate genomic relationships within a population, current genetic variances are estimated. In this article, we theoretically derived the properties of the genomic relationship matrix to estimate genetic correlations between populations and validated it using simulations. When the scaling factor of across-population genomic relationships is equal to the product of the square roots of the scaling factors for within-population genomic relationships, the genetic correlation is estimated unbiasedly even though estimated genetic variances do not necessarily refer to the current population. When this property is not met, the correlation based on estimated variances should be multiplied by a correction factor based on the scaling factors. In this study, we present a genomic relationship matrix which directly estimates current genetic variances as well as genetic correlations between populations.

BackgroundA condition to predict unbiased estimated breeding values by best linear unbiased prediction is to use simultaneously all available data. However, this condition is not often fully met. For example, in dairy cattle, internal (i.e. local) populations lead to evaluations based only on internal records while widely used foreign sires have been selected using internally unavailable external records. In such cases, internal genetic evaluations may be less accurate and biased. Because external records are unavailable, methods were developed to combine external information that summarizes these records, i.e. external estimated breeding values and associated reliabilities, with internal records to improve accuracy of internal genetic evaluations. Two issues of these methods concern double-counting of contributions due to relationships and due to records. These issues could be worse if external information came from several evaluations, at least partially based on the same records, and combined into a single internal evaluation. Based on a Bayesian approach, the aim of this research was to develop a unified method to integrate and blend simultaneously several sources of information into an internal genetic evaluation by avoiding double-counting of contributions due to relationships and due to records.ResultsThis research resulted in equations that integrate and blend simultaneously several sources of information and avoid double-counting of contributions due to relationships and due to records. The performance of the developed equations was evaluated using simulated and real datasets. The results showed that the developed equations integrated and blended several sources of information well into a genetic evaluation. The developed equations also avoided double-counting of contributions due to relationships and due to records. Furthermore, because all available external sources of information were correctly propagated, relatives of external animals benefited from the integrated information and, therefore, more reliable estimated breeding values were obtained.ConclusionsThe proposed unified method integrated and blended several sources of information well into a genetic evaluation by avoiding double-counting of contributions due to relationships and due to records. The unified method can also be extended to other types of situations such as single-step genomic or multi-trait evaluations, combining information across different traits.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12711-014-0059-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The aim of this research was to compare different Bayesian procedures to integrate information from outside a given evaluation system, hereafter called external information, and in this context estimated breeding