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

Kahsay G Nirea, Anna K Sonesson, John A Woolliams, Theo He Meuwissen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: 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.
Original languageEnglish
Article number11
Number of pages7
JournalGenetics Selection Evolution
Volume44
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of non-random mating on genomic and BLUP selection schemes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this