Modeling within and between Sub-Genomes Epistasis of Synthetic Hexaploid Wheat for Genome-Enabled Prediction of Diseases.

Common wheat (Triticum aestivum) is a hexaploid crop comprising three diploid sub-genomes labeled A, B, and D. The objective of this study is to investigate whether there is a discernible influence pattern from the D sub-genome with epistasis in genomic models for wheat diseases. Four genomic statistical models were employed; two models considered the linear genomic relationship of the lines. The first model (G) utilized all molecular markers, while the second model (ABD) utilized three matrices representing the A, B, and D sub-genomes. The remaining two models incorporated epistasis, one (GI) using all markers and the other (ABDI) considering markers in sub-genomes A, B, and D, including inter- and intra-sub-genome interactions. The data utilized pertained to three diseases: tan spot (TS), septoria nodorum blotch (SNB), and spot blotch (SB), for synthetic hexaploid wheat (SHW) lines. The results (variance components) indicate that epistasis makes a substantial contribution to explaining genomic variation, accounting for approximately 50% in SNB and SB and only 29% for TS. In this contribution of epistasis, the influence of intra- and inter-sub-genome interactions of the D sub-genome is crucial, being close to 50% in TS and higher in SNB (60%) and SB (60%). This increase in explaining genomic variation is reflected in an enhancement of predictive ability from the G model (additive) to the ABDI model (additive and epistasis) by 9%, 5%, and 1% for SNB, SB, and TS, respectively. These results, in line with other studies, underscore the significance of the D sub-genome in disease traits and suggest a potential application to be explored in the future regarding the selection of parental crosses based on sub-genomes.

Impact of interpopulation distance on dominance variance and average heterosis in hybrid populations within species.

Interpopulation improvement for crosses of close populations in crops and livestock depends on the amount of heterosis and the amount of variance of dominance deviations in the hybrids. It has been intuited that the further the distance between populations, the lower the amount of dominance variation and the higher the heterosis. Although experience in speciation and interspecific crosses shows, however, that this is not the case when populations are so distant-here we confine ourselves to the case of not-too-distant populations typical in crops and livestock. We present equations that relate the distance between 2 populations, expressed as Nei's genetic distance or as correlation of allele frequencies, quadratically to the amount of dominance deviations across all possible crosses and linearly to the expected heterosis averaging all possible crosses. The amount of variation of dominance deviations decreases with genetic distance until the point where allele frequencies are uncorrelated, and then increases for negatively correlated frequencies. Heterosis always increases with Nei's genetic distance. These expressions match well and complete previous theoretical and empirical findings. In practice, and for close enough populations, they mean that unless frequencies are negatively correlated, selection for hybrids will be more efficient when populations are distant.

Computing strategies for multi-population genomic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Multiple breed evaluation using genomic prediction includes the use of data from multiple populations, or from parental breeds and crosses, and is expected to lead to better genomic predictions. Increased complexity comes from the need to fit non-additive effects such as dominance and/or genotype-by-environment interactions. In these models, marker effects (and breeding values) are modelled as correlated between breeds, which leads to multiple trait formulations that are based either on markers [single nucleotide polymorphism best linear unbiased prediction (SNP-BLUP)] or on individuals [genomic(G)BLUP)]. As an alternative, we propose the use of generalized least squares (GLS) followed by backsolving of marker effects using selection index (SI) theory. RESULTS: All investigated options have advantages and inconveniences. The SNP-BLUP yields marker effects directly, which are useful for indirect prediction and for planned matings, but is very large in number of equations and is structured in dense and sparse blocks that do not allow for simple solving. GBLUP uses a multiple trait formulation and is very general, but results in many equations that are not used, which increase memory needs, and is also structured in dense and sparse blocks. An alternative formulation of GBLUP is more compact but requires tailored programming. The alternative of solving by GLS + SI is the least consuming, both in number of operations and in memory, and it uses only single dense blocks. However, it requires dedicated programming. Computational complexity problems are exacerbated when more than additive effects are fitted, e.g. dominance effects or genotype x environment interactions. CONCLUSIONS: As multi-breed predictions become more frequent and non-additive effects are more often included, standard equations for genomic prediction based on Henderson's mixed model equations become less practical and may need to be replaced by more efficient (although less general) approaches such as the GLS + SI approach proposed here.

Genomic prediction of hybrid crops allows disentangling dominance and epistasis.

We revisited, in a genomic context, the theory of hybrid genetic evaluation models of hybrid crosses of pure lines, as the current practice is largely based on infinitesimal model assumptions. Expressions for covariances between hybrids due to additive substitution effects and dominance and epistatic deviations were analytically derived. Using dense markers in a GBLUP analysis, it is possible to split specific combining ability into dominance and across-groups epistatic deviations, and to split general combining ability (GCA) into within-line additive effects and within-line additive by additive (and higher order) epistatic deviations. We analyzed a publicly available maize data set of Dent × Flint hybrids using our new model (called GCA-model) up to additive by additive epistasis. To model higher order interactions within GCAs, we also fitted "residual genetic" line effects. Our new GCA-model was compared with another genomic model which assumes a uniquely defined effect of genes across origins. Most variation in hybrids is accounted by GCA. Variances due to dominance and epistasis have similar magnitudes. Models based on defining effects either differently or identically across heterotic groups resulted in similar predictive abilities for hybrids. The currently used model inflates the estimated additive genetic variance. This is not important for hybrid predictions but has consequences for the breeding scheme-e.g. overestimation of the genetic gain within heterotic group. Therefore, we recommend using GCA-model, which is appropriate for genomic prediction and variance component estimation in hybrid crops using genomic data, and whose results can be practically interpreted and used for breeding purposes.

Purebred and Crossbred Genomic Evaluation and Mate Allocation Strategies To Exploit Dominance in Pig Crossbreeding Schemes.

We investigated the effectiveness of mate allocation strategies accounting for non-additive genetic effects to improve crossbred performance in a two-way crossbreeding scheme. We did this by computer simulation of 10 generations of evaluation and selection. QTL effects were simulated as correlated across purebreds and crossbreds, and (positive) heterosis was simulated as directional dominance. The purebred-crossbred correlation was 0.30 or 0.68 depending on the genetic variance component used. Dominance and additive marker effects were estimated simultaneously for purebreds and crossbreds by multiple trait genomic BLUP. Four scenarios that differ in the sources of information (only purebred data, or purebred and crossbred data) and mate allocation strategies (mating at random, minimizing expected future inbreeding, or maximizing the expected total genetic value of crossbred animals) were evaluated under different cases of genetic variance components. Selecting purebred animals for purebred performance yielded a response of 0.2 genetic standard deviations of the trait "crossbred performance" per generation, whereas selecting purebred animals for crossbred performance doubled the genetic response. Mate allocation strategy to maximize the expected total genetic value of crossbred descendants resulted in a slight increase (0.8%, 4% and 0.5% depending on the genetic variance components) of the crossbred performance. Purebred populations increased homozygosity, but the heterozygosity of the crossbreds remained constant. When purebred-crossbred genetic correlation is low, selecting purebred animals for crossbred performance using crossbred information is a more efficient strategy to exploit heterosis and increase performance at the crossbred commercial level, whereas mate allocation did not improve crossbred performance.

SNP-based mate allocation strategies to maximize total genetic value in pigs.

BACKGROUND: Mate allocation strategies that account for non-additive genetic effects can be used to maximize the overall genetic merit of future offspring. Accounting for dominance effects in genetic evaluations is easier in a genomic context, than in a classical pedigree-based context because the combinations of alleles at loci are known. The objective of our study was two-fold. First, dominance variance components were estimated for age at 100 kg (AGE), backfat depth (BD) at 140 days, and for average piglet weight at birth within litter (APWL). Second, the efficiency of mate allocation strategies that account for dominance and inbreeding depression to maximize the overall genetic merit of future offspring was explored. RESULTS: Genetic variance components were estimated using genomic models that included inbreeding depression with and without non-additive genetic effects (dominance). Models that included dominance effects did not fit the data better than the genomic additive model. Estimates of dominance variances, expressed as a percentage of additive genetic variance, were 20, 11, and 12% for AGE, BD, and APWL, respectively. Estimates of additive and dominance single nucleotide polymorphism effects were retrieved from the genetic variance component estimates and used to predict the outcome of matings in terms of total genetic and breeding values. Maximizing total genetic values instead of breeding values in matings gave the progeny an average advantage of - 0.79 days, - 0.04 mm, and 11.3 g for AGE, BD and APWL, respectively, but slightly reduced the expected additive genetic gain, e.g. by 1.8% for AGE. CONCLUSIONS: Genomic mate allocation accounting for non-additive genetic effects is a feasible and potential strategy to improve the performance of the offspring without dramatically compromising additive genetic gain.