Comparison of sequencing-based and array-based genotyping platforms for genomic prediction of maize hybrid performance

被引:11
|
作者
Yu, Guangning [1 ]
Cui, Yanru [2 ]
Jiao, Yuxin [1 ]
Zhou, Kai [1 ]
Wang, Xin [1 ]
Yang, Wenyan [1 ]
Xu, Yiyi [1 ]
Yang, Kun [1 ]
Zhang, Xuecai [3 ]
Li, Pengcheng [1 ]
Yang, Zefeng [1 ]
Xu, Yang [1 ]
Xu, Chenwu [1 ]
机构
[1] Yangzhou Univ, Coll Agr, Jiangsu Coinnovat Ctr Modern Prod Technol Grain Cr, Key Lab Plant Funct Genom,Minist Educ,Jiangsu Key, Yangzhou 225009, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] Hebei Agr Univ, State Key Lab North China Crop Improvement & Regul, Baoding 071001, Hebei, Peoples R China
[3] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr CIMMYT, Mexico City 06600, DF, Mexico
来源
CROP JOURNAL | 2023年 / 11卷 / 02期
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Genomic selection; Maize; GBS; SNP array; Marker density; POPULATIONS; ASSOCIATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.cj.2022.09.004
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Genomic selection (GS) is a powerful tool for improving genetic gain in maize breeding. However, its rou-tine application in large-scale breeding pipelines is limited by the high cost of genotyping platforms. Although sequencing-based and array-based genotyping platforms have been used for GS, few studies have compared prediction performance among platforms. In this study, we evaluated the predictabilities of four agronomic traits in 305 maize hybrids derived from 149 parental lines subjected to genotyping by sequencing (GBS), a 40K SNP array, and target sequence capture (TSC) using eight GS models. The GBS marker dataset yielded the highest predictabilities for all traits, followed by TSC and SNP array datasets. We investigated the effect of marker density and statistical models on predictability among genotyping platforms and found that 1K SNPs were sufficient to achieve comparable predictabilities to 10K and all SNPs, and BayesB, GBLUP, and RKHS performed well, while XGBoost performed poorly in most cases. We also selected significant SNP subsets using genome-wide association study (GWAS) analyses in three panels to predict hybrid performance. GWAS facilitated selecting effective SNP subsets for GS and thus reduced genotyping cost, but depended heavily on the GWAS panel. We conclude that there is still room for optimization of the existing SNP array, and using genotyping by target sequencing (GBTS) techniques to integrate a few functional markers identified by GWAS into the 1K SNP array holds great promise of being an effective strategy for developing desirable GS breeding arrays.(c) 2022 Crop Science Society of China and Institute of Crop Science, CAAS. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:490 / 498
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Genomic profiling of rectal adenoma and carcinoma by array-based comparative genomic hybridization
    Zhi-Zhou Shi
    Yue-Ming Zhang
    Li Shang
    Jia-Jie Hao
    Tong-Tong Zhang
    Bo-Shi Wang
    Jian-Wei Liang
    Xi Chen
    Ying Zhang
    Gui-Qi Wang
    Ming-Rong Wang
    Yu Zhang
    BMC Medical Genomics, 5
  • [32] Application of array-based comparative genomic hybridization to clinical diagnostics
    Bejjani, Bassem A.
    Shaffer, Lisa G.
    JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS, 2006, 8 (05): : 528 - 533
  • [33] Array-based comparative genomic hybridization in chronic lymphocytic leukemia
    Lennon, P. Alan
    ANNALS OF CLINICAL AND LABORATORY SCIENCE, 2010, 40 (02): : 189 - 189
  • [34] Small RNA-based prediction of hybrid performance in maize
    Seifert, Felix
    Thiemann, Alexander
    Schrag, Tobias A.
    Rybka, Dominika
    Melchinger, Albrecht E.
    Frisch, Matthias
    Scholten, Stefan
    BMC GENOMICS, 2018, 19
  • [35] Small RNA-based prediction of hybrid performance in maize
    Felix Seifert
    Alexander Thiemann
    Tobias A. Schrag
    Dominika Rybka
    Albrecht E. Melchinger
    Matthias Frisch
    Stefan Scholten
    BMC Genomics, 19
  • [36] Assessment of next-generation sequencing-based polygenic risk score genotyping for breast cancer risk prediction
    Baumann, Alexandra
    Ruckert, Christian
    Meier, Christoph
    Hutschenreiter, Tim
    Remy, Robert
    Schnur, Benedikt
    Doebel, Marvin
    Fankep, Rudel Nkouamedjo
    Skowronek, Dariush
    Kutz, Oliver
    Arnold, Norbert
    Katzke, Anna-Lena
    Forster, Michael
    Kobiela, Anna-Lena
    Thiedig, Katharina
    Zimmer, Andreas
    Ritter, Julia
    Weber, Bernhard
    Honisch, Ellen
    Hackmann, Karl
    Schmidt, Gunnar
    Sturm, Marc
    Ernst, Corinna
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2024, 32 : 1656 - 1657
  • [37] Assessment of next-generation sequencing-based polygenic risk score genotyping for breast cancer risk prediction
    Baumann, Alexandra
    Ruckert, Christian
    Meier, Christoph
    Hutschenreiter, Tim
    Remy, Robert
    Schnur, Benedikt
    Doebel, Marvin
    Fankep, Rudel Nkouamedjo
    Skowronek, Dariush
    Kutz, Oliver
    Arnold, Norbert
    Katzke, Anna-Lena
    Forster, Michael
    Kobiela, Anna-Lena
    Thiedig, Katharina
    Zimmer, Andreas
    Ritter, Julia
    Weber, Bernhard
    Honisch, Ellen
    Hackmann, Karl
    Schmidt, Gunnar
    Sturm, Marc
    Ernst, Corinna
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2024, 32 : 1656 - 1657
  • [38] Conversion of array-based single nucleotide polymorphic markers for use in targeted genotyping by sequencing in hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum)
    Burridge, Amanda J.
    Wilkinson, Paul A.
    Winfield, Mark O.
    Barker, Gary L. A.
    Allen, Alexandra M.
    Coghill, Jane A.
    Waterfall, Christy
    Edwards, Keith J.
    PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL, 2018, 16 (04) : 867 - 876
  • [39] Application of Genotyping-by-Sequencing on Semiconductor Sequencing Platforms: A Comparison of Genetic and Reference-Based Marker Ordering in Barley
    Mascher, Martin
    Wu, Shuangye
    St Amand, Paul
    Stein, Nils
    Poland, Jesse
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (10):
  • [40] Systematic comparison of sequencing-based spatial transcriptomic methods
    You, Yue
    Fu, Yuting
    Li, Lanxiang
    Zhang, Zhongmin
    Jia, Shikai
    Lu, Shihong
    Ren, Wenle
    Liu, Yifang
    Xu, Yang
    Liu, Xiaojing
    Jiang, Fuqing
    Peng, Guangdun
    Sampath Kumar, Abhishek
    Ritchie, Matthew E.
    Liu, Xiaodong
    Tian, Luyi
    NATURE METHODS, 2024, 21 (09) : 1743 - 1754