37 Single-step Genomic BLUP Fitting Snps or Haplotypes in Genetically-diverse Populations: A Simulation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The successful implementation of genomic selection in more genetically diverse populations (e.g., sheep and goats) require larger training populations. Haplotype-based genomic predictions are hypothesized to perform better in comparison to single-SNP methods mainly due to the possibility of better capturing QTL effects in linkage disequilibrium (LD) with the markers. However, most genomic-prediction studies based on haplotypes were performed in populations with low effective population size (Ne < 150). We aimed to investigate alternative approaches for fitting haplotypes using the single-step GBLUP method (ssGBLUP) in a genetically diverse population (Ne = 400). We simulated a composite sheep population, mimicking real populations based on literature parameters, using the QMSim software, with five replicates. We simulated a HD panel (600K) and two traits with different heritabilites (0.10 and 0.30). Pseudo-SNPs from unique haplotype alleles derived from LD blocks with thresholds of 0.1, 0.3, and 0.6 (LD01, LD03, and LD06, respectively) were used in the analyses. The LD-blocks were constructed using a 50K panel designed from the simulated HD. The training population was composed of 60,000 individuals with phenotypes, 8,000 of them also had genotypes, and 2,000 young genotyped individuals were used as the validation set. The genomic relationship (G) in the ssGBLUP was constructed using both independent markers and pseudo-SNPs (haplotypes). A linear mixed effects model was used to test the effect of the G on the accuracies of prediction, followed by the Tukey test with 5% of significance. No blocks were created with LD06. The accuracies with the 50K panel, LD01, and LD03 for the moderate heritability were 0.41(0.00), 0.40(0.01) and 0.41(0.00), respectively, and 0.24(0.01) 0.23(0.01), and 0.24(0.01) for the low heritability scenario. No statistical differences were observed. Based on our findings, haplotype-based predictions did not improve the accuracy of genomic breeding values in genetically diverse populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".