Influence of epistasis on response to genomic selection using complete sequence data

Abstract

BackgroundThe effect of epistasis on response to selection is a highly debated topic. Here, we investigated the impact of epistasis on response to sequence-based selection via genomic best linear prediction (GBLUP) in a regime of strong non-symmetrical epistasis under divergent selection, using real Drosophila sequence data. We also explored the possible advantage of including epistasis in the evaluation model and/or of knowing the causal mutations.ResultsResponse to selection was almost exclusively due to changes in allele frequency at a few loci with a large effect. Response was highly asymmetric (about four phenotypic standard deviations higher for upward than downward selection) due to the highly skewed site frequency spectrum. Epistasis accentuated this asymmetry and affected response to selection by modulating the additive genetic variance, which was sustained for longer under upward selection whereas it eroded rapidly under downward selection. Response to selection was quite insensitive to the evaluation model, especially under an additive scenario. Nevertheless, including epistasis in the model when there was none eventually led to lower accuracies as selection proceeded. Accounting for epistasis in the model, if it existed, was beneficial but only in the medium term. There was not much gain in response if causal mutations were known, compared to using sequence data, which is likely due to strong linkage disequilibrium, high heritability and availability of phenotypes on candidates.ConclusionsEpistatic interactions affect the response to genomic selection by modulating the additive genetic variance used for selection. Epistasis releases additive variance that may increase response to selection compared to a pure additive genetic action. Furthermore, genomic evaluation models and, in particular, GBLUP are robust, i.e. adding complexity to the model did not modify substantially the response (for a given architecture).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12711-017-0340-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Can Deep Learning Improve Genomic Prediction of Complex Human Traits?

“…Bayesian GBLUP using BRR prior and eigenvalue decomposition of G and D was employed to estimate genomic heritabilities with the BGLR package [see Forneris et al (2017) for an application of this model]. Genomic matrices were computed with a Fortran program that employs Basic Linear Algebra Subroutines (BLAS) (Dongarra et al 1990, www. netlib.org/blas/) for efficient parallelization, available at https://github.com/miguelperezenciso/dogrm.…”

Influence of a growth hormone transgene on the genetic architecture of growth‐related traits: A comparative analysis between transgenic and wild‐type coho salmon

“…There is significant evidence from this study that the transgene alters the effect size of key loci in the coho salmon genome. While response to selection is often ascribed primarily to additive genetic variation (Hill, Goddard, & Visscher, 2008), epistatic variation can act to release additive variance by influencing effect sizes QTL (Forneris, Vitezica, Legarra, & Pérez-Enciso, 2017), thus accelerating the rate of evolution (Paixão & Barton, 2016). Selection may direct phenotypes to faster or slower growth, depending on whether T fish have enhanced or diminished fitness relative to wild type.…”

SeqBreed: a python tool to evaluate genomic prediction in complex scenarios

“…We illustrate the software with sequence data from the Drosophila genome reference panel (DGRP, [21]), parsed and filtered as explained in [22], and genotype data from tetraploid potato [23], parsed as described in [7]. Data and scripts are in https ://githu b.com/migue lpere zenci so/ # 10 QTNs are simulated, h2 of the trait is 0.7 qtn = gg.QTNs(h2=[0.7], genome=gfeatures, nqtn=10) # environmental variances are computed qtn.get_var(gfeatures, gbase) Selection is implemented in cycles, the number of generations, the numbers of males and females selected, and family size must be specified.…”