4.7 Article

Impact of genotypic errors with equal and unequal family contribution on accuracy of genomic prediction in aquaculture using simulation

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-97873-5

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genotypic errors can impact the accuracy of genomic predictions and genomic relationship matrix, but their influence may not be substantial across different datasets. Increasing SNP density from 3 to 20 K can marginally enhance the accuracy of genomic predictions using the current population and genomic parameters.
Genotypic errors, conflict between recorded genotype and the true genotype, can lead to false or biased population genetic parameters. Here, the effect of genotypic errors on accuracy of genomic predictions and genomic relationship matrix are investigated using a simulation study based on population and genomic structure comparable to black tiger prawn, Penaeus monodon. Fifty full-sib families across five generations with phenotypic and genotypic information on 53 K SNPs were simulated. Ten replicates of different scenarios with three heritability estimates, equal and unequal family contributions were generated. Within each scenario, four SNP densities and three genotypic error rates in each SNP density were implemented. Results showed that family contribution did not have a substantial impact on accuracy of predictions across different datasets. In the absence of genotypic errors, 3 K SNP density was found to be efficient in estimating the accuracy, whilst increasing the SNP density from 3 to 20 K resulted in a marginal increase in accuracy of genomic predictions using the current population and genomic parameters. In addition, results showed that the presence of even 10% errors in a 10 and 20 K SNP panel might not have a severe impact on accuracy of predictions. However, below 10 K marker density, even a 5% error can result in lower accuracy of predictions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available