PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - G. R. Gowane
AU  - Sang Hong Lee
AU  - Sam Clark
AU  - Nasir Moghaddar
AU  - Hawlader A Al-Mamun
AU  - Julius H. J. van der Werf
TI  - Effect of selection on bias and accuracy in genomic prediction of breeding values
AID  - 10.1101/298042
DP  - 2018 Jan 01
TA  - bioRxiv
PG  - 298042
4099  - http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/04/09/298042.short
4100  - http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/04/09/298042.full
AB  - Reference populations for genomic selection (GS) usually involve highly selected individuals, which may result in biased prediction of estimated genomic breeding values (GEBV). In the present study, bias and accuracy of GEBV were explored for various genetic models and prediction methods when using selected individuals for a reference. Data were simulated for an animal breeding program to compare Best Linear Unbiased Prediction of breeding values using pedigree based relationships (PBLUP), genomic relationships for genotyped animals only (GBLUP) and a Single Step approach (SSGBLUP), where information on genotyped individuals was used to infer a matrix H with relationships among all available genotyped and non-genotyped individuals that were linked through pedigree. In SSGBLUP, various weights (α=0.95, 0.80, 0.50) for the genomic relationship matrix (G) relative to the numerator relationship matrix (A) were applied to construct H and in another version (SSGBLUP_F), inbreeding was accounted for while computing A-1. With GBLUP, accuracy of GEBV prediction increased linearly with an increase in the number of animals selected in reference. For the scenario with no-selection and random mating (RR) prediction was unbiased. For GBLUP, lower accuracy and bias observed in the scenarios with selection and random mating (SR) or selection and positive assortative mating (SA), in which prediction bias increased when a smaller and highly selected proportion genotyped. Bias disappeared when all individuals were genotyped. SSGBLUP_F showed higher accuracy compared to GBLUP and bias of prediction was negligible even with selective genotyping. However, PBLUP and SSGBLUP showed bias in SA owing to not fully accounting for allele frequency changes because of selection of quantitative trait loci (QTL) with larger effects and also due to high inbreeding rate. In genetic models with fewer QTL but each with larger effect, predictions were less accurate and more biased for selection scenarios. Results suggest that prediction accuracy and bias is affected by the genetic architecture of the trait. Selective genotyping lead to significant bias in GEBV prediction. SSGBLUP with appropriate scaling of A and G matrices can provide accurate and less biased prediction but scaling requires careful consideration in populations under selection and with high levels of inbreeding.