首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Annales de G n ;tique et de S lection Animale >Should genetic groups be fitted in BLUP evaluation? Practical answer for the French AI beef sire evaluation
【2h】

Should genetic groups be fitted in BLUP evaluation? Practical answer for the French AI beef sire evaluation

机译:是否应将遗传群体纳入BLUP评估?法国AI牛肉父亲评估的实用答案

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Some analytical and simulated criteria were used to determine whether a priori genetic differences among groups, which are not accounted for by the relationship matrix, ought to be fitted in models for genetic evaluation, depending on the data structure and the accuracy of the evaluation. These criteria were the mean square error of some extreme contrasts between animals, the true genetic superiority of animals selected across groups, i.e. the selection response, and the magnitude of selection bias (difference between true and predicted selection responses). The different statistical models studied considered either fixed or random genetic groups (based on six different years of birth) versus ignoring the genetic group effects in a sire model. Including fixed genetic groups led to an overestimation of selection response under BLUP selection across groups despite the unbiasedness of the estimation, i.e. despite the correct estimation of differences between genetic groups. This overestimation was extremely important in numerical applications which considered two kinds of within-station progeny test designs for French purebred beef cattle AI sire evaluation across years: the reference sire design and the repeater sire design. When assuming a priori genetic differences due to the existence of a genetic trend of around 20% of genetic standard deviation for a trait with h2 = 0.4, in a repeater sire design, the overestimation of the genetic superiority of bulls selected across groups varied from about 10% for an across-year selection rate p = 1/6 and an accurate selection index (100 progeny records per sire) to 75% for p = 1/2 and a less accurate selection index (20 progeny records per sire). This overestimation decreased when the genetic trend, the heritability of the trait, the accuracy of the evaluation or the connectedness of the design increased. Whatever the data design, a model of genetic evaluation without groups was preferred to a model with genetic groups when the genetic trend was in the range of likely values in cattle breeding programs (0 to 20% of genetic standard deviation). In such a case, including random groups was pointless and including fixed groups led to a large overestimation of selection response, smaller true selection response across groups and larger variance of estimation of the differences between groups. Although the genetic trend was correctly predicted by a model fitting fixed genetic groups, important errors in predicting individual breeding values led to incorrect ranking of animals across groups and, consequently, led to lower selection response.
机译:根据数据结构和评估的准确性,使用了一些分析和模拟标准来确定是否应将群体之间的先验遗传差异(不是由关系矩阵解释)是否适合用于遗传评估的模型中。这些标准是动物之间某些极端对比的均方误差,在各组之间选择的动物的真实遗传优势,即选择反应以及选择偏倚的大小(真实和预测选择反应之间的差异)。研究的不同统计模型考虑了固定或随机遗传组(基于六个不同的出生年份),而忽略了父亲模型中的遗传组效应。尽管估计是无偏的,即尽管正确估计了遗传组之间的差异,但包括固定的遗传组仍导致在BLUP选择下跨组的选择反应被高估了。这种高估在数值应用中非常重要,因为数值应用考虑了法国纯种肉牛AI父系多年来评估的两种站内子代测试设计:参考父系设计和直发子系设计。当假设由于h 2 = 0.4的性状存在约20%的遗传标准偏差的遗传趋势而导致先验遗传差异时,在中继器父亲设计中,遗传优势被高估了跨组选择的公牛的数量从全年选择率p = 1/6和准确选择指数(每个父系100个子代记录)的约10%到p = 1/2和准确度较低的选择指数(75%)每个后代20个后代记录)。当遗传趋势,性状的遗传性,评估的准确性或设计的关联性增加时,这种高估就会减少。无论数据设计如何,当遗传趋势在牛育种计划的可能值范围内(遗传标准偏差的0%到20%)时,无组遗传评价模型都比有遗传组模型更好。在这种情况下,包括随机组是没有意义的,而包含固定组会导致选择响应的高估,组间较小的真实选择响应以及组间差异的估计方差较大。尽管可以通过拟合固定遗传群体的模型正确预测遗传趋势,但是在预测单个繁殖值时的重大错误会导致动物在不同群体之间的排名不正确,从而导致较低的选择反应。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号