TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of genomic prediction methods for fusarium head blight resistance in wheat
AU - Rutkoski, Jessica
AU - Benson, Jared
AU - Jia, Yi
AU - Brown-Guedira, Gina
AU - Jannink, Jean Luc
AU - Sorrells, Mark
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance is quantitative and difficult to evaluate. Genomic selection (GS) could accelerate FHB resistance breeding. We used U.S. cooperative FHB wheat nursery data to evaluate GS models for several FHB resistance traits including deoxynivalenol (DON) levels. For all traits we compared the models: ridge regression (RR), Bayesian LASSO (BL), reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces (RKHS) regression, random forest (RF) regression, and multiple linear regression (MLR) (fixed effects). For DON, we evaluated additional prediction methods including bivariate RR models, phenotypes for correlated traits, and RF regression models combining markers and correlated phenotypes as predictors. Additionally, for all traits, we compared different marker sets including genomewide markers, FHB quantitative trait loci (QTL) targeted markers, and boThsets combined. Genomic selection accuracies were always higher than MLR accuracies, RF and RKHS regression were often the most accurate methods, and for DON, marker plus trait RF regression was more accurate than all other methods. For all traits except DON, using QTL targeted markers alone led to lower accuracies than using genomewide markers. This study indicates that cooperative FHB nursery data can be useful for GS, and prior information about correlated traits and QTL could be used to improve accuracies in some cases.
AB - Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance is quantitative and difficult to evaluate. Genomic selection (GS) could accelerate FHB resistance breeding. We used U.S. cooperative FHB wheat nursery data to evaluate GS models for several FHB resistance traits including deoxynivalenol (DON) levels. For all traits we compared the models: ridge regression (RR), Bayesian LASSO (BL), reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces (RKHS) regression, random forest (RF) regression, and multiple linear regression (MLR) (fixed effects). For DON, we evaluated additional prediction methods including bivariate RR models, phenotypes for correlated traits, and RF regression models combining markers and correlated phenotypes as predictors. Additionally, for all traits, we compared different marker sets including genomewide markers, FHB quantitative trait loci (QTL) targeted markers, and boThsets combined. Genomic selection accuracies were always higher than MLR accuracies, RF and RKHS regression were often the most accurate methods, and for DON, marker plus trait RF regression was more accurate than all other methods. For all traits except DON, using QTL targeted markers alone led to lower accuracies than using genomewide markers. This study indicates that cooperative FHB nursery data can be useful for GS, and prior information about correlated traits and QTL could be used to improve accuracies in some cases.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84878558210&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84878558210&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3835/plantgenome2012.02.0001
DO - 10.3835/plantgenome2012.02.0001
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84878558210
SN - 1940-3372
VL - 5
SP - 51
EP - 61
JO - Plant Genome
JF - Plant Genome
IS - 2
ER -