A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models

<p>Abstract</p> <p>An increased availability of genotypes at marker loci has prompted the development of models that include the effect of individual genes. Selection based on these models is known as marker-assisted selection (MAS). MAS is known to be efficient especially for trai...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dekkers Jack CM, Fernando Rohan L, Totir Liviu R, Fernández Soledad A, Guldbrandtsen Bernt
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: BMC 2003-11-01
Series:Genetics Selection Evolution
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.gsejournal.org/content/35/7/585
id doaj-531d385d75bb466585489fe82ae89fc2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-531d385d75bb466585489fe82ae89fc22020-11-25T00:34:59ZdeuBMCGenetics Selection Evolution0999-193X1297-96862003-11-0135758560410.1186/1297-9686-35-7-585A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus modelsDekkers Jack CMFernando Rohan LTotir Liviu RFernández Soledad AGuldbrandtsen Bernt<p>Abstract</p> <p>An increased availability of genotypes at marker loci has prompted the development of models that include the effect of individual genes. Selection based on these models is known as marker-assisted selection (MAS). MAS is known to be efficient especially for traits that have low heritability and non-additive gene action. BLUP methodology under non-additive gene action is not feasible for large inbred or crossbred pedigrees. It is easy to incorporate non-additive gene action in a finite locus model. Under such a model, the unobservable genotypic values can be predicted using the conditional mean of the genotypic values given the data. To compute this conditional mean, conditional genotype probabilities must be computed. In this study these probabilities were computed using iterative peeling, and three Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods – scalar Gibbs, blocking Gibbs, and a sampler that combines the Elston Stewart algorithm with iterative peeling (ESIP). The performance of these four methods was assessed using simulated data. For pedigrees with loops, iterative peeling fails to provide accurate genotype probability estimates for some pedigree members. Also, computing time is exponentially related to the number of loci in the model. For MCMC methods, a linear relationship can be maintained by sampling genotypes one locus at a time. Out of the three MCMC methods considered, ESIP, performed the best while scalar Gibbs performed the worst.</p> http://www.gsejournal.org/content/35/7/585genotype probabilitiesfinite locus modelsMarkov chain Monte Carlo
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dekkers Jack CM
Fernando Rohan L
Totir Liviu R
Fernández Soledad A
Guldbrandtsen Bernt
spellingShingle Dekkers Jack CM
Fernando Rohan L
Totir Liviu R
Fernández Soledad A
Guldbrandtsen Bernt
A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
Genetics Selection Evolution
genotype probabilities
finite locus models
Markov chain Monte Carlo
author_facet Dekkers Jack CM
Fernando Rohan L
Totir Liviu R
Fernández Soledad A
Guldbrandtsen Bernt
author_sort Dekkers Jack CM
title A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
title_short A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
title_full A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
title_fullStr A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
title_sort comparison of alternative methods to compute conditional genotype probabilities for genetic evaluation with finite locus models
publisher BMC
series Genetics Selection Evolution
issn 0999-193X
1297-9686
publishDate 2003-11-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>An increased availability of genotypes at marker loci has prompted the development of models that include the effect of individual genes. Selection based on these models is known as marker-assisted selection (MAS). MAS is known to be efficient especially for traits that have low heritability and non-additive gene action. BLUP methodology under non-additive gene action is not feasible for large inbred or crossbred pedigrees. It is easy to incorporate non-additive gene action in a finite locus model. Under such a model, the unobservable genotypic values can be predicted using the conditional mean of the genotypic values given the data. To compute this conditional mean, conditional genotype probabilities must be computed. In this study these probabilities were computed using iterative peeling, and three Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods – scalar Gibbs, blocking Gibbs, and a sampler that combines the Elston Stewart algorithm with iterative peeling (ESIP). The performance of these four methods was assessed using simulated data. For pedigrees with loops, iterative peeling fails to provide accurate genotype probability estimates for some pedigree members. Also, computing time is exponentially related to the number of loci in the model. For MCMC methods, a linear relationship can be maintained by sampling genotypes one locus at a time. Out of the three MCMC methods considered, ESIP, performed the best while scalar Gibbs performed the worst.</p>
topic genotype probabilities
finite locus models
Markov chain Monte Carlo
url http://www.gsejournal.org/content/35/7/585
work_keys_str_mv AT dekkersjackcm acomparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT fernandorohanl acomparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT totirliviur acomparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT fernandezsoledada acomparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT guldbrandtsenbernt acomparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT dekkersjackcm comparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT fernandorohanl comparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT totirliviur comparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT fernandezsoledada comparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
AT guldbrandtsenbernt comparisonofalternativemethodstocomputeconditionalgenotypeprobabilitiesforgeneticevaluationwithfinitelocusmodels
_version_ 1725311081508765696