Expanding the application of haplotype-based genomic predictions to the wild: A case of antibody response against Teladorsagia circumcincta in Soay sheep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genomic prediction of breeding values (GP) has been adopted in evolutionary genomic studies to uncover microevolutionary processes of wild populations or improve captive breeding strategies. While recent evolutionary studies applied GP with individual single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), haplotype-based GP could outperform individual SNP predictions through better capturing the linkage disequilibrium (LD) between the SNP and quantitative trait loci (QTL). This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and bias of haplotype-based GP of immunoglobulin (Ig) A (IgA), IgE, and IgG against Teladorsagia circumcincta in lambs of an unmanaged sheep population (Soay breed) based on Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Prediction (GBLUP) and five Bayesian [BayesA, BayesB, BayesCπ, Bayesian Lasso (BayesL), and BayesR] methods. RESULTS: The accuracy and bias of GPs using SNP, haplotypic pseudo-SNP from blocks with different LD thresholds (0.15, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, and 1.00), or the combinations of pseudo-SNPs and non-LD clustered SNPs were obtained. Across methods and marker sets, higher ranges of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) accuracies were observed for IgA (0.20 to 0.49), followed by IgE (0.08 to 0.20) and IgG (0.05 to 0.14). Considering the methods evaluated, up to 8% gains in GP accuracy of IgG were achieved using pseudo-SNPs compared to SNPs. Up to 3% gain in GP accuracy for IgA was also obtained using the combinations of the pseudo-SNPs with non-clustered SNPs in comparison to fitting individual SNP. No improvement in GP accuracy of IgE was observed using haplotypic pseudo-SNPs or their combination with non-clustered SNPs compared to individual SNP. Bayesian methods outperformed GBLUP for all traits. Most scenarios yielded lower accuracies for all traits with an increased LD threshold. GP models using haplotypic pseudo-SNPs predicted less-biased GEBVs mainly for IgG. For this trait, lower bias was observed with higher LD thresholds, whereas no distinct trend was observed for other traits with changes in LD. CONCLUSIONS: Haplotype information improves GP performance of anti-helminthic antibody traits of IgA and IgG compared to fitting individual SNP. The observed gains in the predictive performances indicate that haplotype-based methods could benefit GP of some traits in wild animal 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".