Effect of non-random mating on genomic and BLUP selection schemes

12Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The risk of long-term unequal contribution of mating pairs to the gene pool is that deleterious recessive genes can be expressed. Such consequences could be alleviated by appropriately designing and optimizing breeding schemes i.e. by improving selection and mating procedures. Methods. We studied the effect of mating designs, random, minimum coancestry and minimum covariance of ancestral contributions on rate of inbreeding and genetic gain for schemes with different information sources, i.e. sib test or own performance records, different genetic evaluation methods, i.e. BLUP or genomic selection, and different family structures, i.e. factorial or pair-wise. Results: Results showed that substantial differences in rates of inbreeding due to mating design were present under schemes with a pair-wise family structure, for which minimum coancestry turned out to be more effective to generate lower rates of inbreeding. Specifically, substantial reductions in rates of inbreeding were observed in schemes using sib test records and BLUP evaluation. However, with a factorial family structure, differences in rates of inbreeding due mating designs were minor. Moreover, non-random mating had only a small effect in breeding schemes that used genomic evaluation, regardless of the information source. Conclusions: It was concluded that minimum coancestry remains an efficient mating design when BLUP is used for genetic evaluation or when the size of the population is small, whereas the effect of non-random mating is smaller in schemes using genomic evaluation. © 2012 Nirea et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nirea, K. G., Sonesson, A. K., Woolliams, J. A., & Meuwissen, T. H. E. (2012). Effect of non-random mating on genomic and BLUP selection schemes. Genetics Selection Evolution, 44(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-44-11

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free