Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Proceedings and BioMed Central.

This article is part of the supplement: Proceedings of the 15th European workshop on QTL mapping and marker assisted selection (QTLMAS)

Open Access Proceedings

A two step Bayesian approach for genomic prediction of breeding values

Mohammad M Shariati12*, Peter Sørensen1 and Luc Janss1

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Faculty of Science and Technology, Aarhus University, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark

2 Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, 91775 Mashhad, Iran

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Proceedings 2012, 6(Suppl 2):S12  doi:10.1186/1753-6561-6-S2-S12

Published: 21 May 2012

Abstract

Background

In genomic models that assign an individual variance to each marker, the contribution of one marker to the posterior distribution of the marker variance is only one degree of freedom (df), which introduces many variance parameters with only little information per variance parameter. A better alternative could be to form clusters of markers with similar effects where markers in a cluster have a common variance. Therefore, the influence of each marker group of size p on the posterior distribution of the marker variances will be p df.

Methods

The simulated data from the 15th QTL-MAS workshop were analyzed such that SNP markers were ranked based on their effects and markers with similar estimated effects were grouped together. In step 1, all markers with minor allele frequency more than 0.01 were included in a SNP-BLUP prediction model. In step 2, markers were ranked based on their estimated variance on the trait in step 1 and each 150 markers were assigned to one group with a common variance. In further analyses, subsets of 1500 and 450 markers with largest effects in step 2 were kept in the prediction model.

Results

Grouping markers outperformed SNP-BLUP model in terms of accuracy of predicted breeding values. However, the accuracies of predicted breeding values were lower than Bayesian methods with marker specific variances.

Conclusions

Grouping markers is less flexible than allowing each marker to have a specific marker variance but, by grouping, the power to estimate marker variances increases. A prior knowledge of the genetic architecture of the trait is necessary for clustering markers and appropriate prior parameterization.