Exploring unknown parent groups and metafounders in single-step genomic BLUP: Insights from a simulated cattle population

• Published in: Journal of dairy science
• Main Authors: Himmelbauer, Judith, Schwarzenbacher, Hermann, Fuerst, Christian, Fuerst-Waltl, Birgit
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 20.06.2024
• ISSN: 1525-3198; 1525-3198
• DOI: 10.3168/jds.2024-24891

This study explores how the metafounder (MF) concept enhances genetic evaluations in dairy cattle populations using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP). By improving the consideration of relationships among founder populations, MF ensures accurate alignment of pedigree and genomic relationships. The research aims to propose a method for grouping MF based on genotypic information, assess different approaches for estimating the gamma matrix, and compare unknown parent groups (UPG) and MF methodologies across various scenarios, including those with low and high pedigree completeness based on a simulated dairy cattle population. In the scenario where unknown ancestors are rare, the impact of UPG or MF on breeding values is minimal but MF still performs slightly better compared with UPG. The scenario with lower genotyping rates and more unknown parents shows significant differences in evaluations with and without UPG and also compared with MF. The study shows that ssGBLUP evaluations where UPG are considered via Quaas-Pollak-transformation in the pedigree-based and genomic relationship matrix (UPG_fullQP) results in double counting and subsequently in a pronounced bias and overdispersion. Another focus is on the estimation of the gamma matrix, emphasizing the importance of crossbred genotypes for accuracy. Challenges emerge in classifying animals into subpopulations and further into MF or UPG, but the method used in this study, which is based on genotypes, results in predictions which are comparable to those obtained using the true subpopulations for the assignment. Estimated validation results using the linear regression method confirm the superior performance of MF evaluations, although differences compared with true validations are smaller. Notably, UPG_fullQP's extreme bias is less evident in routine validation statistics.This study explores how the metafounder (MF) concept enhances genetic evaluations in dairy cattle populations using single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP). By improving the consideration of relationships among founder populations, MF ensures accurate alignment of pedigree and genomic relationships. The research aims to propose a method for grouping MF based on genotypic information, assess different approaches for estimating the gamma matrix, and compare unknown parent groups (UPG) and MF methodologies across various scenarios, including those with low and high pedigree completeness based on a simulated dairy cattle population. In the scenario where unknown ancestors are rare, the impact of UPG or MF on breeding values is minimal but MF still performs slightly better compared with UPG. The scenario with lower genotyping rates and more unknown parents shows significant differences in evaluations with and without UPG and also compared with MF. The study shows that ssGBLUP evaluations where UPG are considered via Quaas-Pollak-transformation in the pedigree-based and genomic relationship matrix (UPG_fullQP) results in double counting and subsequently in a pronounced bias and overdispersion. Another focus is on the estimation of the gamma matrix, emphasizing the importance of crossbred genotypes for accuracy. Challenges emerge in classifying animals into subpopulations and further into MF or UPG, but the method used in this study, which is based on genotypes, results in predictions which are comparable to those obtained using the true subpopulations for the assignment. Estimated validation results using the linear regression method confirm the superior performance of MF evaluations, although differences compared with true validations are smaller. Notably, UPG_fullQP's extreme bias is less evident in routine validation statistics.