共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 359 毫秒
1.
2.
国际奶牛基因组选择的发展概况 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
二十一世纪初,基因组选择(Genomic Selection,GS)技术给传统奶牛育种体系带来新的活力。该方法利用基因芯片技术实现规模化的SNP标记多态检测,基于各国积累的大量后裔测定遗传评估结果,实现单个遗传标记或多个遗传标记构成单倍型的遗传效应估计。基因组选择的方法仅利用新生后备种公牛的基因组检测信息,即可实现动物个体的基因组育种值(GEBV)估计,据研究报道,其可靠性高于传统的系谱选择,最高可达75%左右。基因组选择策略实现乳用种公牛的早期选择,极大缩短了奶牛遗传改良的世代间隔,节约选育成本,提高选育效率,目前已在多个奶业发达国家具体实施并公开发布评定结果。本文对国际奶牛基因组选择的发展概况进行归纳综述。 相似文献
3.
我国荷斯坦青年公牛基因组选择效果分析 总被引：2，自引：2，他引：0
本研究基于我国荷斯坦奶牛基因组遗传评估和生产性能测定（DHI）结果,旨在分析我国荷斯坦公牛基因组选择的效果。选择1 686头既有基因组遗传评估成绩又有后裔测定成绩的荷斯坦公牛,利用2019年12月基因组遗传评估结果及其女儿的产奶和体型性状数据,通过R软件与Excel计算公牛基因组评估结果与公牛女儿表型数据间的相关性,对我国荷斯坦青年公牛基因组选择效果进行分析。相关性分析结果表明,荷斯坦公牛的基因组性能指数（GCPI）与后裔测定性能指数（CPI）呈正相关（rs>0.3）,其中产奶量和体细胞评分的基因组育种值（GEBV）与估计育种值（EBV）呈较强的正相关（0.4 < rs < 0.8）。对公牛女儿表型数据分析结果表明,女儿产奶量、乳蛋白率、乳脂率与肢蹄评分的表型值与公牛GEBV分组趋势一致,且公牛不同产奶性状GEBV组间的女儿性状表型值大部分达到极显著差异（P<0.01）;北京及上海地区公牛产奶性状、体细胞评分和肢蹄评分的GEBV分组与女儿表型值趋势较其他省市（地区）更一致,且GEBV高组与低组之间差值均高于其他省市（地区）。基于1 686头荷斯坦公牛基因组选择及其女儿表型数据的分析结果表明,我国荷斯坦公牛的基因组遗传评估准确性较好,其中产奶量、乳蛋白率、体细胞评分和肢蹄评分的表型数据更好地反映了基因组选择的效果;北京及上海地区较其他省市（地区）更能反映我国荷斯坦公牛基因组选择的效果。 相似文献
4.
全基因组选择技术在牧场的应用 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
奶牛育种是牧场管理工作中的基础工作,全基因组选择技术为牧场奶牛育种提供了新的育种工具,是目前奶牛选种育种已成熟使用的最前沿技术,该技术主要通过检测覆盖全基因组的分子标记,利用基因组水平的遗传信息对个体进行遗传评估,可以大幅提高育种值估计准确度、缩短世代间隔、降低群体的近交水平,快速提升个体遗传进展和生产水平。本文对全基因组选择技术的发展、遗传进展进行了论述并对牧场检测的头胎母牛305d产奶量、乳脂率、乳蛋白率等表型值与基因组检测的产奶量、乳脂率、乳脂量、乳蛋白率、乳蛋白量5个生产性能单性状育种值进行分析,为基因组选择在牧场的应用提供参考。 相似文献
5.
全基因组选择模型研究进展及展望 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
全基因组选择是一种利用覆盖全基因组的高密度标记进行选择育种的新方法,可通过早期选择缩短世代间隔,提高育种值估计准确性等加快遗传进展,尤其对低遗传力、难测定的复杂性状具有较好的预测效果,真正实现了基因组技术指导育种实践。随着芯片和测序技术日趋成熟,高密度标记芯片检测成本不断降低,全基因组选择模型的不断升级和优化,预测准确性不断提高,全基因组选择已成为动物遗传改良的重要手段和研究热点。目前,全基因组选择已经成为奶牛遗传评估的标准方法,并取得重要进展,在其它物种中的应用正在逐步开展。本文主要对全基因组选择的统计模型发展进行综述,总结全基因组选择在动物遗传育种中的应用现状,讨论当前存在的问题,并对全基因组选择模型的发展方向和应用前景进行展望。 相似文献
6.
7.
8.
《黑龙江畜牧兽医》2014,(15)
奶牛育种规划是奶牛育种领域最重要,也是最复杂的问题之一,文章简要介绍了关于奶牛育种规划的概念、基本内容和工作流程,另外还介绍了目前最流行的基因组选择技术在奶牛育种体系中的应用情况。随着基因组技术的不断发展,如何在奶牛育种规划中应用基因组选择技术以及如何提高基因组选择准确性(rmg)已经成为学者最关心的问题。传统后裔测定育种规划(CPTP)和基因组选择育种规划(GBP)在世代间隔、育种成本投入以及遗传选择准确性方面有明显的差异,尽管GBP在育种投入方面与CPTP相比有非常明显的优势,但是由于rmg[基因组育种值(GEBV)与育种值真值之间的相关]值偏小,在青年公牛选育方面还需要谨慎对待。影响rmg的因素主要有4个,其中标记与数量性状基因座(QTL)之间的连锁不平衡程度(LD)和参考群体规模可以在模拟计算和育种实践中通过技术手段和育种投入加以控制并改善。文章旨在利用基因组选择技术彻底改变目前传统的奶牛育种体系的架构,极大程度地丰富奶牛育种规划的设计方案,并提高奶牛育种规划的育种效果和经济效益。 相似文献
9.
10.
为探究单步基因组最佳线性无偏预测(SSGBLUP)法应用于生猪育种的选择效果，选取杜洛克、长白、大白种猪共1 996头，利用SNP芯片获得个体基因型数据，结合表型数据和系谱数据，利用HIBLUP软件的SSGBLUP模型和基于系谱的最佳线性无偏预测(PBLUP)模型分别计算估计育种值，参考全国种猪遗传评估中心的标准计算综合选择指数，利用理论准确性和后裔测定成绩评估选择效果。结果表明：通过SSGBLUP法计算达100 kg日龄、达100 kg背膘厚及总产仔数的基因组估计育种值(GEBV)与PBLUP法计算的估计育种值(EBV)的相关系数均大于0.8;达100 kg日龄、达100 kg背膘厚及总产仔数GEBV准确性相对于EBV准确性均有所提高；SSGBLUP法与PBLUP法选留的长白和大白种猪，其后代的生长速度显著优于场内选择法选留种猪的后代。本试验中，SSGBLUP法与PBLUP法均能有效提高选留种猪后代的生长速度且二者分别计算的GEBV和EBV相关性高，但SSGBLUP法选种的准确性更高，后期可利用全基因组选择对场内现有种猪进行选种指导。 相似文献
11.
畜禽基因组选择的研究进展 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
基因组选择（genomic selection,GS）是继标记辅助选择（marker-assisted selection,MAS）之后发展起来的新一代畜禽遗传评估的新方法。近年来,不少学者从各方面对GS在畜禽育种中的运用进行了研究,结果发现,与其他方法相比,GS优势明显,是当前畜禽遗传育种领域的研究热点。作者系统地阐述了GS估计染色体片段效应的方法及其准确性比较,详细介绍了影响GS准确性的因素、GS的经济效益,以及世界各国学者研究GS在实际育种中的应用情况,最后简述了中国畜禽育种开展GS策略所面临的挑战及其展望。 相似文献
12.
T.M. Villumsen L. Janss & M.S. Lund 《Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie》2009,126(1):3-13
Reliabilities for genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were investigated by simulation for a typical dairy cattle breeding setting. Scenarios were simulated with different heritabilites ( h 2 ) and for different haplotype sizes, and seven generations with only genotypes were generated to investigate reliability of GEBV over time. A genome with 5000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) at distances of 0.1 cM and 50 quantitative trait loci (QTL) was simulated, and a Bayesian variable selection model was implemented to predict GEBV. Highest reliabilities were obtained for 10 SNP haplotypes. At optimal haplotype size, reliabilities in generation 1 without phenotypes ranged from 0.80 for h 2 = 0.02 to 0.93 for h 2 = 0.30, and in the seventh generation without phenotypes ranged from 0.69 for h 2 = 0.02 to 0.86 for h 2 = 0.30. Reliabilities of GEBV were found sufficiently high to implement dairy selection schemes without progeny testing in which case a data time-lag of two to three generations may be present. Reliabilities were also relatively high for low heritable traits, implying that genomic selection could be especially beneficial to improve the selection on, e.g. health and fertility. 相似文献
13.
Buch LH Sørensen MK Berg P Pedersen LD Sørensen AC 《Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie》2012,129(2):138-151
We tested the following hypotheses: (i) breeding schemes with genomic selection are superior to breeding schemes without genomic selection regarding annual genetic gain of the aggregate genotype (ΔG(AG) ), annual genetic gain of the functional traits and rate of inbreeding per generation (ΔF), (ii) a positive interaction exists between the use of genotypic information and a short generation interval on ΔG(AG) and (iii) the inclusion of an indicator trait in the selection index will only result in a negligible increase in ΔG(AG) if genotypic information about the breeding goal trait is known. We examined four breeding schemes with or without genomic selection and with or without intensive use of young bulls using pseudo-genomic stochastic simulations. The breeding goal consisted of a milk production trait and a functional trait. The two breeding schemes with genomic selection resulted in higher ΔG(AG) , greater contributions of the functional trait to ΔG(AG) and lower ΔF than the two breeding schemes without genomic selection. Thus, the use of genotypic information may lead to more sustainable breeding schemes. In addition, a short generation interval increases the effect of using genotypic information on ΔG(AG) . Hence, a breeding scheme with genomic selection and with intensive use of young bulls (a turbo scheme) seems to offer the greatest potential. The third hypothesis was disproved as inclusion of genomically enhanced breeding values (GEBV) for an indicator trait in the selection index increased ΔG(AG) in the turbo scheme. Moreover, it increased the contribution of the functional trait to ΔG(AG) , and it decreased ΔF. Thus, indicator traits may still be profitable to use even when GEBV for the breeding goal traits are available. 相似文献
14.
Four methods of selection for net merit comprising 2 correlated traits were compared in this study: 1) EBV-only index (I?), which consists of the EBV of both traits (i.e., traditional 2-trait BLUP selection); 2) GEBV-only index (I?), which comprises the genomic EBV (GEBV) of both traits; 3) GEBV-assisted index (I?), which combines both the EBV and the GEBV of both traits; and 4) GBV-assisted index (I?), which combines both the EBV and the true genomic breeding value (GBV) of both traits. Comparisons of these indices were based on 3 evaluation criteria [selection accuracy, genetic response (ΔH), and relative efficiency] under 64 scenarios that arise from combining 2 levels of genetic correlation (r(G)), 2 ratios of genetic variances between traits, 2 ratios of the genomic variance to total genetic variances for trait 1, 4 accuracies of EBV, and 2 proportions of r(G) explained by the GBV. Both selection accuracy and genetic responses of the indices I?, I?, and I? increased as the accuracy of EBV increased, but the efficiency of the indices I? and I? relative to I? decreased as the accuracy of EBV increased. The relative efficiency of both I? and I? was generally greater when the accuracy of EBV was 0.6 than when it was 0.9, suggesting that the genomic markers are most useful to assist selection when the accuracy of EBV is low. The GBV-assisted index I? was superior to the GEBV-assisted I? in all 64 cases examined, indicating the importance of improving the accuracy of prediction of genomic breeding values. Other parameters being identical, increasing the genetic variance of a high heritability trait would increase the genetic response of the genomic indices (I?, I?, and I?). The genetic responses to I?, I?, and I(4) was greater when the genetic correlation between traits was positive (r(G) = 0.5) than when it was negative (r(G) = -0.5). The results of this study indicate that the effectiveness of the GEBV-assisted index I? is affected by heritability of and genetic correlation between traits, the ratio of genetic variances between traits, the genomic-genetic variance ratio of each index trait, the proportion of genetic correlation accounted for by the genomic markers, and the accuracy of predictions of both EBV and GBV. However, most of these affecting factors are genetic characteristics of a population that is beyond the control of the breeders. The key factor subject to manipulation is to maximize both the proportion of the genetic variance explained by GEBV and the accuracy of both GEBV and EBV. The developed procedures provide means to investigate the efficiency of various genomic indices for any given combination of the genetic factors studied. 相似文献
15.
基于不同密度SNP芯片在杜洛克公猪中的全基因组选择效果分析 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
《中国畜牧杂志》2019,(12)
基因组选择(GS)是近些年发展起来的一项新型育种技术,目前已在动植物育种实践中应用。本研究通过在1 068头杜洛克公猪群体中使用不同密度的SNP芯片进行全基因组选择效果比较分析。结果发现:使用基因型填充后芯片以及高密度SNP芯片所获得的估计基因组育种值(GEBV)之间可以达到99%的相关,并发现个体间亲缘关系的远近对同群体内基因型填充结果的准确率影响不大。由此可见,与目标性状紧密相关的低密度SNP芯片可用于实际育种工作,在降低使用成本的同时并不影响全基因组选择效果,为实质性进行猪分子育种提供了一条可行途径。 相似文献
16.
LIU Tianfei LUO Chenglong WANG Yan ZHOU Guangyuan MA Jie SHU Dingming SU Guosheng QU Hao 《畜牧兽医学报》1956,51(10):2378-2386
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of the genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) using reduced-representation genome sequencing technology and SNP chip technology to implement genomic selection. A total of 395 individuals (212♂+ 183♀, from 8 half-sib families) were randomly selected from F2 generation of AH broiler resource population, and genotyped with 10×specific-locus amplified fragment sequencing (SLAF-seq) and Illumina Chicken 60K SNP BeadChip. Genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) and BayesCπ were used to compare the accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) for 6 traits: body weight at the 6th week, body weight at the 12th week, average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), feed conversion ratio (FCR) and residual feed intake (RFI). A 5-fold cross validation procedure was used to verify the accuracies of GEBV between prediction models and between genotyping platforms. The results showed that there was no significant difference between accuracies of GEBV predicted by GBLUP and BayesCπ using the same genotyping platform(P>0.05). The superiority of the two genotyping platforms was different for different traits. For body weight at the 6th week, the accuracy of GEBV was higher using chip SNPs (P<0.05). On the contrary, the accuracy was higher using SLAF-seq for residual feed intake (P<0.05). Comprehensive comparison of the means of GEBV for 6 traits, the difference between the two genotyping platforms was less than 0.01, therefore, both high throughput sequencing and chip SNPs can be used for genomic selection in yellow-feathered broiler. 相似文献
17.
旨在比较简化基因组测序技术和基因芯片技术实施基因组选择的基因组估计育种值（GEBV）准确性。本研究在AH肉鸡资源群体F2代中随机选取395个个体（其中公鸡212只,母鸡183只,来自8个半同胞家系）,同时采用10×SLAF测序技术和Illumina Chicken 60K SNP芯片进行基因标记分型。采用基因组最佳无偏估计法（GBLUP）和BayesCπ对6周体重、12周体重、日均增重、日均采食量、饲料转化率和剩余采食量等6个性状进行GEBV准确性比较研究,并采用5折交叉验证法验证。结果表明,采用同一基因标记分型平台,两种育种值估计方法所得GEBV准确性差异不显著（P>0.05）;不同的性状对基因标记分型平台的选择存在差异,对于6周体重,使用基因芯片可获得更高的GEBV准确性（P<0.05）,对于剩余采食量,则使用简化基因组测序可获得更高的GEBV准确性（P<0.05）。综合6个性状GEBV均值比较,两个基因标记分型平台之间差异不到0.01,高通量测序技术和基因芯片技术都可以用于黄羽肉鸡基因组选择。 相似文献
18.
基因组选配（genomic mating,GM）是利用基因组信息进行优化的选种选配,可以有效控制群体近交水平的同时实现最大化的遗传进展。但基因组选配是对群体中所有个体进行选配,这与实际的育种工作有点相悖。本研究模拟了遗传力为0.5的9 000头个体的基础群数据,每个世代根据GEBV选择30头公畜、900头母畜作为种用个体,而后使用基因组选配、同质选配、异质选配、随机交配4种不同的选配方案。其中基因组选配中分别选取遗传进展最大的解、家系间方差最大的解、近交最小的解所对应的交配方案进行选育。每种方案选育5个世代,比较其后代群体的平均GEBV、每世代的遗传进展、近交系数、遗传方差,并重复5次取平均值。结果表明,3种基因组选配方案的ΔG均显著高于随机交配和异质选配（P<0.01）,而且,选取遗传进展最大的基因组选配方案的ΔG比同质选配还高出4.3%。3种基因组选配的方案的ΔF比同质选配低22.2%~94.1%,而且选取近交最小的基因组选配方案ΔF比异质选配低11.8%。同质选配的遗传方差迅速降低,在第5世代显著低于除基因组选配中选择遗传进展最大的方案以外的所有方案（P<0.05）,3种基因组选配方案的遗传方差比同质选配高10.8%~32.2%。这表明基因组选配不仅可以获得比同质选配更高的遗传进展,同时有效的降低了近交水平,并且减缓了遗传方差降低速度,保证了一定的遗传变异。基因组选配作为一种有效的可持续育种方法,在畜禽育种中开展十分有必要。 相似文献
19.
M. Haile‐Mariam G.J. Nieuwhof K.T. Beard K.V. Konstatinov B.J. Hayes 《Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie》2013,130(1):20-31
The reliability of genomic evaluations depends on the proportion of genetic variation explained by the DNA markers. In this study, we have estimated the proportion of variance in daughter trait deviations (DTDs) of dairy bulls explained by 45 993 genome wide single‐nucleotide poly‐ morphism (SNP) markers for 29 traits in Australian Holstein‐Friesian dairy cattle. We compare these proportions to the proportion of variance in DTDs explained by the additive relationship matrix derived from the pedigree, as well as the sum of variance explained by both pedigree and marker information when these were fitted simultaneously. The propor‐ tion of genetic variance in DTDs relative to the total genetic variance (the total genetic variance explained by the genomic relationships and pedigree relationships when both were fitted simultaneously) varied from 32% for fertility to approximately 80% for milk yield traits. When fitting genomic and pedigree relationships simultaneously, the variance unexplained (i.e. the residual variance) in DTDs of the total variance for most traits was reduced compared to fitting either individually, suggesting that there is not complete overlap between the effects. The proportion of genetic variance accounted by the genomic relationships can be used to modify the blending equations used to calculate genomic estimated breeding value (GEBV) from direct genomic breeding value (DGV) and parent average. Our results, from a validation population of young dairy bulls with DTD, suggest that this modification can improve the reliability of GEBV by up to 5%. 相似文献
20.
W.M. Muir 《Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie》2007,124(6):342-355
Accuracy of prediction of estimated breeding values based on genome-wide markers (GEBV) and selection based on GEBV as compared with traditional Best Linear Unbiased Prediction (BLUP) was examined for a number of alternatives, including low heritability, number of generations of training, marker density, initial distributions, and effective population size (Ne). Results show that the more the generations of data in which both genotypes and phenotypes were collected, termed training generations (TG), the better the accuracy and persistency of accuracy based on GEBV. GEBV excelled for traits of low heritability regardless of initial equilibrium conditions, as opposed to traditional marker-assisted selection, which is not useful for traits of low heritability. Effective population size is critical for populations starting in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium but not for populations started from mutation-drift equilibrium. In comparison with traditional BLUP, GEBV can exceed the accuracy of BLUP provided enough TG are included. Unfortunately selection rapidly reduces the accuracy of GEBV. In all cases examined, classic BLUP selection exceeds what was possible for GEBV selection. Even still, GEBV could have an advantage over traditional BLUP in cases such as sex-limited traits, traits that are expensive to measure, or can only be measured on relatives. A combined approach, utilizing a mixed model with a second random effect to account for quantitative trait loci in linkage equilibrium (the polygenic effect) was suggested as a way to capitalize on both methodologies. 相似文献