Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops.

While sparse testing methods have been proposed by researchers to improve the efficiency of genomic selection (GS) in breeding programs, there are several factors that can hinder this. In this research, we evaluated four methods (M1-M4) for sparse testing allocation of lines to environments under multi-environmental trails for genomic prediction of unobserved lines. The sparse testing methods described in this study are applied in a two-stage analysis to build the genomic training and testing sets in a strategy that allows each location or environment to evaluate only a subset of all genotypes rather than all of them. To ensure a valid implementation, the sparse testing methods presented here require BLUEs (or BLUPs) of the lines to be computed at the first stage using an appropriate experimental design and statistical analyses in each location (or environment). The evaluation of the four cultivar allocation methods to environments of the second stage was done with four data sets (two large and two small) under a multi-trait and uni-trait framework. We found that the multi-trait model produced better genomic prediction (GP) accuracy than the uni-trait model and that methods M3 and M4 were slightly better than methods M1 and M2 for the allocation of lines to environments. Some of the most important findings, however, were that even under a scenario where we used a training-testing relation of 15-85%, the prediction accuracy of the four methods barely decreased. This indicates that genomic sparse testing methods for data sets under these scenarios can save considerable operational and financial resources with only a small loss in precision, which can be shown in our cost-benefit analysis.

Sparse multi-trait genomic prediction under balanced incomplete block design.

Sparse testing is essential to increase the efficiency of the genomic selection methodology, as the same efficiency (in this case prediction power) can be obtained while using less genotypes evaluated in the fields. For this reason, it is important to evaluate the existing methods for performing the allocation of lines to environments. With this goal, four methods (M1-M4) to allocate lines to environments were evaluated under the context of a multi-trait genomic prediction problem: M1 denotes the allocation of a fraction (subset) of lines in all locations, M2 denotes the allocation of a fraction of lines with some shared lines in locations but not arranged based on the balanced incomplete block design (BIBD) principle, M3 denotes the random allocation of a subset of lines to locations, and M4 denotes the allocation of a subset of lines to locations using the BIBD principle. The evaluation was done using seven real multi-environment data sets common in plant breeding programs. We found that the best method was M4 and the worst was M1, while no important differences were found between M3 and M4. We concluded that M4 and M3 are efficient in the context of sparse testing for multi-trait prediction.

Accounting for Correlation Between Traits in Genomic Prediction.

Genomic enabled prediction is playing a key role for the success of genomic selection (GS). However, according to the No Free Lunch Theorem, there is not a universal model that performs well for all data sets. Due to this, many statistical and machine learning models are available for genomic prediction. When multitrait data is available, models that are able to account for correlations between phenotypic traits are preferred, since these models help increase the prediction accuracy when the degree of correlation is moderate to large. For this reason, in this chapter we review multitrait models for genome-enabled prediction and we illustrate the power of this model with real examples. In addition, we provide details of the software (R code) available for its application to help users implement these models with its own data. The multitrait models were implemented under conventional Bayesian Ridge regression and best linear unbiased predictor, but also under a deep learning framework. The multitrait deep learning framework helps implement prediction models with mixed outcomes (continuous, binary, ordinal, and count, measured on different scales), which is not easy in conventional statistical models. The illustrative examples are very detailed in order to make the implementation of multitrait models in plant and animal breeding friendlier for breeders and scientists.

A zero altered Poisson random forest model for genomic-enabled prediction.

In genomic selection choosing the statistical machine learning model is of paramount importance. In this paper, we present an application of a zero altered random forest model with two versions (ZAP_RF and ZAPC_RF) to deal with excess zeros in count response variables. The proposed model was compared with the conventional random forest (RF) model and with the conventional Generalized Poisson Ridge regression (GPR) using two real datasets, and we found that, in terms of prediction performance, the proposed zero inflated random forest model outperformed the conventional RF and GPR models.

A New Deep Learning Calibration Method Enhances Genome-Based Prediction of Continuous Crop Traits.

Genomic selection (GS) has the potential to revolutionize predictive plant breeding. A reference population is phenotyped and genotyped to train a statistical model that is used to perform genome-enabled predictions of new individuals that were only genotyped. In this vein, deep neural networks, are a type of machine learning model and have been widely adopted for use in GS studies, as they are not parametric methods, making them more adept at capturing nonlinear patterns. However, the training process for deep neural networks is very challenging due to the numerous hyper-parameters that need to be tuned, especially when imperfect tuning can result in biased predictions. In this paper we propose a simple method for calibrating (adjusting) the prediction of continuous response variables resulting from deep learning applications. We evaluated the proposed deep learning calibration method (DL_M2) using four crop breeding data sets and its performance was compared with the standard deep learning method (DL_M1), as well as the standard genomic Best Linear Unbiased Predictor (GBLUP). While the GBLUP was the most accurate model overall, the proposed deep learning calibration method (DL_M2) helped increase the genome-enabled prediction performance in all data sets when compared with the traditional DL method (DL_M1). Taken together, we provide evidence for extending the use of the proposed calibration method to evaluate its potential and consistency for predicting performance in the context of GS applied to plant breeding.