Genomic prediction in hybrid breeding: II. Reciprocal recurrent genomic selection with full-sib and half-sib families

Key messageGenomic prediction of GCA effects based on model training with full-sib rather than half-sib families yields higher short- and long-term selection gain in reciprocal recurrent genomic selection for hybrid breeding, if SCA effects are important.AbstractReciprocal recurrent genomic selection (RRGS) is a powerful tool for ensuring sustainable selection progress in hybrid breeding. For training the statistical model, one can use half-sib (HS) or full-sib (FS) families produced by inter-population crosses of candidates from the two parent populations. Our objective was to compare HS-RRGS and FS-RRGS for the cumulative selection gain (& sigma;& UDelta;G\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Sigma \Delta G$$\end{document}), the genetic, GCA and SCA variances (& sigma;G2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\sigma_{G}<^>{2}$$\end{document},& sigma;gca2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\sigma_{gca}<^>{2}$$\end{document}, & sigma;sca2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\sigma_{sca}<^>{2}$$\end{document}) of the hybrid population, and prediction accuracy (rgca\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$r_{gca}$$\end{document}) for GCA effects across cycles. Using SNP data from maize and wheat, we simulated RRGS programs over 10 cycles, each consisting of four sub-cycles with genomic selection of Ne=20\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$N_{e} = 20$$\end{document} out of 950 candidates in each parent population. Scenarios differed for heritability h2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\left( {h<^>{2} } \right)$$\end{document} and the proportion & tau;=100x & sigma;sca2:& sigma;G2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau = 100 \times \sigma_{sca}<^>{2} :\sigma_{G}<^>{2}$$\end{document} of traits, training set (TS) size (NTS\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$N_{TS}$$\end{document}), and maize vs. wheat. Curves of & sigma;& UDelta;G\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Sigma \Delta G$$\end{document} over selection cycles showed no crossing of both methods. If & tau;\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau$$\end{document} was high, & sigma;& UDelta;G\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Sigma \Delta G$$\end{document} was generally higher for FS-RRGS than HS-RRGS due to higher rgca\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$r_{gca}$$\end{document}. In contrast, HS-RRGS was superior or on par with FS-RRGS, if & tau;\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau$$\end{document} or h2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$h<^>{2}$$\end{document} and NTS\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$N_{TS}$$\end{document} were low. & sigma;& UDelta;G\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\Sigma \Delta G$$\end{document} showed a steeper increase and higher selection limit for scenarios with low & tau;\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\tau$$\end{document}, high h2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$h<^>{2}$$\end{document} and large NTS\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$N_{TS}$$\end{document}. & sigma;gca2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\sigma_{gca}<^>{2}$$\end{document} and even more so & sigma;sca2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\sigma_{sca}<^>{2}$$\end{document} decreased rapidly over cycles for both methods due to the high selection intensity and the role of the Bulmer effect for reducing & sigma;gca2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$\sigma_{gca}<^>{2}$$\end{document}. Since the TS for FS-RRGS can additionally be used for hybrid prediction, we recommend this method for achieving simultaneously the two major goals in hybrid breeding: population improvement and cultivar development.

Automated summary

Using full-sib families for model training instead of half-sib families leads to higher short- and long-term selection gain in reciprocal recurrent genomic selection for hybrid breeding.