» Articles » PMID: 33381150

Improving Genomic Prediction of Crossbred and Purebred Dairy Cattle

Overview
Journal Front Genet
Date 2020 Dec 31
PMID 33381150
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study assessed the accuracy and bias of genomic prediction (GP) in purebred Holstein (H) and Jersey (J) as well as crossbred (H and J) validation cows using different reference sets and prediction strategies. The reference sets were made up of different combinations of 36,695 H and J purebreds and crossbreds. Additionally, the effect of using different sets of marker genotypes on GP was studied (conventional panel: 50k, custom panel enriched with, or close to, causal mutations: XT_50k, and conventional high-density with a limited custom set: pruned HDnGBS). We also compared the use of genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and Bayesian (emBayesR) models, and the traits tested were milk, fat, and protein yields. On average, by including crossbred cows in the reference population, the prediction accuracies increased by 0.01-0.08 and were less biased (regression coefficient closer to 1 by 0.02-0.16), and the benefit was greater for crossbreds compared to purebreds. The accuracy of prediction increased by 0.02 using XT_50k compared to 50k genotypes without affecting the bias. Although using pruned HDnGBS instead of 50k also increased the prediction accuracy by about 0.02, it increased the bias for purebred predictions in emBayesR models. Generally, emBayesR outperformed GBLUP for prediction accuracy when using 50k or pruned HDnGBS genotypes, but the benefits diminished with XT_50k genotypes. Crossbred predictions derived from a joint pure H and J reference were similar in accuracy to crossbred predictions derived from the two separate purebred reference sets and combined proportional to breed composition. However, the latter approach was less biased by 0.13. Most interestingly, using an equalized breed reference instead of an H-dominated reference, on average, reduced the bias of prediction by 0.16-0.19 and increased the accuracy by 0.04 for crossbred and J cows, with a little change in the H accuracy. In conclusion, we observed improved genomic predictions for both crossbreds and purebreds by equalizing breed contributions in a mixed breed reference that included crossbred cows. Furthermore, we demonstrate, that compared to the conventional 50k or high-density panels, our customized set of 50k sequence markers improved or matched the prediction accuracy and reduced bias with both GBLUP and Bayesian models.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of genomic selection models using whole genome sequence data and functional annotation in Belgian Blue cattle.

Yuan C, Gillon A, Gualdron Duarte J, Takeda H, Coppieters W, Georges M Genet Sel Evol. 2025; 57(1):10.

PMID: 40038647 PMC: 11881496. DOI: 10.1186/s12711-025-00955-5.


Using genotype imputation to integrate Canola populations for genome-wide association and genomic prediction of blackleg resistance.

Zhao H, MacLeod I, Keeble-Gagnere G, Barbulescu D, Tibbits J, Kaur S BMC Genomics. 2025; 26(1):215.

PMID: 40038585 PMC: 11877698. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-025-11250-4.


Genetic evaluation of productive longevity in a multibreed beef cattle population.

Passafaro T, Rubio Y, Vukasinovic N, Gonzalez-Pena D, Gordo D, Short T J Anim Sci. 2024; 102.

PMID: 39626265 PMC: 11683841. DOI: 10.1093/jas/skae363.


Single-step genomic predictions for crossbred Holstein and Jersey cattle in the United States.

Cesarani A, Lourenco D, Bermann M, Nicolazzi E, VanRaden P, Misztal I JDS Commun. 2024; 5(2):124-128.

PMID: 38482122 PMC: 10928432. DOI: 10.3168/jdsc.2023-0399.


GWABLUP: genome-wide association assisted best linear unbiased prediction of genetic values.

Meuwissen T, Eikje L, Gjuvsland A Genet Sel Evol. 2024; 56(1):17.

PMID: 38429665 PMC: 11234632. DOI: 10.1186/s12711-024-00881-y.


References
1.
Sorensen M, Norberg E, Pedersen J, Christensen L . Invited review: crossbreeding in dairy cattle: a Danish perspective. J Dairy Sci. 2008; 91(11):4116-28. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2008-1273. View

2.
Habier D, Fernando R, Dekkers J . The impact of genetic relationship information on genome-assisted breeding values. Genetics. 2007; 177(4):2389-97. PMC: 2219482. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.107.081190. View

3.
Esfandyari H, Sorensen A, Bijma P . Maximizing crossbred performance through purebred genomic selection. Genet Sel Evol. 2015; 47:16. PMC: 4358869. DOI: 10.1186/s12711-015-0099-3. View

4.
Hayes B, Bowman P, Chamberlain A, Goddard M . Invited review: Genomic selection in dairy cattle: progress and challenges. J Dairy Sci. 2009; 92(2):433-43. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2008-1646. View

5.
Haile-Mariam M, MacLeod I, Bolormaa S, Schrooten C, OConnor E, de Jong G . Value of sharing cow reference population between countries on reliability of genomic prediction for milk yield traits. J Dairy Sci. 2019; 103(2):1711-1728. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2019-17170. View