Imputation of low-density marker chip data in plant breeding: Evaluation of methods based on sugar beet

2Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Low-density genotyping followed by imputation reduces genotyping costs while still providing high-density marker information. An increased marker density has the potential to improve the outcome of all applications that are based on genomic data. This study investigates techniques for 1k to 20k genomic marker imputation for plant breeding programs with sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L. ssp. vulgaris) as an example crop, where these are realistic marker numbers for modern breeding applications. The generally accepted ‘gold standard’ for imputation, Beagle 5.1, was compared with the recently developed software AlphaPlantImpute2 which is designed specifically for plant breeding. For Beagle 5.1 and AlphaPlantImpute2, the imputation strategy as well as the imputation parameters were optimized in this study. We found that the imputation accuracy of Beagle could be tremendously improved (0.22 to 0.67) by tuning parameters, mainly by lowering the values for the parameter for the effective population size and increasing the number of iterations performed. Separating the phasing and imputation steps also improved accuracies when optimized parameters were used (0.67 to 0.82). We also found that the imputation accuracy of Beagle decreased when more low-density lines were included for imputation. AlphaPlantImpute2 produced very high accuracies without optimization (0.89) and was generally less responsive to optimization. Overall, AlphaPlantImpute2 performed relatively better for imputation whereas Beagle was better for phasing. Combining both tools yielded the highest accuracies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Niehoff, T., Pook, T., Gholami, M., & Beissinger, T. (2022). Imputation of low-density marker chip data in plant breeding: Evaluation of methods based on sugar beet. Plant Genome, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/tpg2.20257

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