Abstract
Abstract Gao et al. propose several approaches to incorporate gene annotation into genomic prediction and evaluate these new methods on populations..... Today, genomic prediction (GP) is an established technology in plant and animal breeding programs. Current standard methods are purely based on statistical considerations but do not make use of the abundant biological knowledge, which is easily available from public databases. Major questions that have to be answered before biological prior information can be used routinely in GP approaches are which types of information can be used, and at which points they can be incorporated into prediction methods. In this study, we propose a novel strategy to incorporate gene annotation into GP of complex phenotypes by defining haploblocks according to gene positions. Haplotype effects are then modeled as categorical or as numerical allele dosage variables. The underlying concept of this approach is to build the statistical model on variables representing the biologically functional units. We evaluate the new methods with data from a heterogeneous stock mouse population, the Drosophila Genetic Reference Panel (DGRP), and a rice breeding population from the Rice Diversity Panel. Our results show that using gene annotation to define haploblocks often leads to a comparable, but for some traits to a higher, predictive ability compared to SNP-based models or to haplotype models that do not use gene annotation information. Modeling gene interaction effects can further improve predictive ability. We also illustrate that the additional use of markers that have not been mapped to any gene in a second separate relatedness matrix does in many cases not lead to a relevant additional increase in predictive ability when the first matrix is based on haploblocks defined with gene annotation data, suggesting that intergenic markers only provide redundant information on the considered data sets. Therefore, gene annotation information seems to be appropriate to perceive the importance of DNA segments. Finally, we discuss the effects of gene annotation quality, marker density, and linkage disequilibrium on the performance of the new methods. To our knowledge, this is the first work that incorporates epistatic interaction or gene annotation into haplotype-based prediction approaches.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 3
Claim · model-written summary
Gene-annotation haploblocks often matched and sometimes exceeded the predictive ability of SNP or unannotated haplotype models.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0
- Outcome
- predictive abilitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- SNP-based modelse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“using gene annotation to define haploblocks often leads to a comparable, but for some traits to a higher, predictive ability compared to SNP-based models or to haplotype models that do not use gene annotation information”
t0“rice breeding population”
Claim · model-written summary
Modeling gene interactions further improved predictive ability.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0
- Outcome
- predictive abilitye0
- Direction
- improvee0
Not reportedComparatorValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modeling gene interaction effects can further improve predictive ability”
t0“rice breeding population”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding unmapped markers often did not materially increase predictive ability beyond annotation-defined haploblocks.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativat0
- Outcome
- predictive abilitye0
- Direction
- not lead to a relevant additional increasee0
- Comparator
- haploblocks defined with gene annotation datae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the additional use of markers that have not been mapped to any gene in a second separate relatedness matrix does in many cases not lead to a relevant additional increase in predictive ability when the first matrix is based on haploblocks defined with gene annotation data”
t0“rice breeding population”