4.7 Article

Genomic predictions for fillet yield and firmness in rainbow trout using reduced-density SNP panels

期刊

BMC GENOMICS
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12864-021-07404-9

关键词

Genomic selection; GEBV; EBV; LD pruning; Predictive ability

资金

  1. United States Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture [2014-67015-21602, 2021-67015-33388]
  2. USDA, Agricultural Research Service CRIS Project [1930-31000-010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genomic evaluation is a feasible strategy to improve fillet yield and quality in rainbow trout, outperforming traditional family-based breeding values. Furthermore, even with low-density SNP panels, genomic predictions show higher predictive abilities than traditional methods.
BackgroundOne of the most important goals for the rainbow trout aquaculture industry is to improve fillet yield and fillet quality. Previously, we showed that a 50K transcribed-SNP chip can be used to detect quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with fillet yield and fillet firmness. In this study, data from 1568 fish genotyped for the 50K transcribed-SNP chip and similar to 774 fish phenotyped for fillet yield and fillet firmness were used in a single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP) model to compute the genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV). In addition, pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (PBLUP) was used to calculate traditional, family-based estimated breeding values (EBV).ResultsThe genomic predictions outperformed the traditional EBV by 35% for fillet yield and 42% for fillet firmness. The predictive ability for fillet yield and fillet firmness was 0.19-0.20 with PBLUP, and 0.27 with ssGBLUP. Additionally, reducing SNP panel densities indicated that using 500-800 SNPs in genomic predictions still provides predictive abilities higher than PBLUP.ConclusionThese results suggest that genomic evaluation is a feasible strategy to identify and select fish with superior genetic merit within rainbow trout families, even with low-density SNP panels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据