application of response surface methods to determine conditions for optimal genomic prediction

Clicks: 239
ID: 156412
2017
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #86 of 194 articles by views in separation and purification technology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 194 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
An epistatic genetic architecture can have a significant impact on prediction accuracies of genomic prediction (GP) methods. Machine learning methods predict traits comprised of epistatic genetic architectures more accurately than statistical methods based on additive mixed linear models. The differences between these types of GP methods suggest a diagnostic for revealing genetic architectures underlying traits of interest. In addition to genetic architecture, the performance of GP methods may be influenced by the sample size of the training population, the number of QTL, and the proportion of phenotypic variability due to genotypic variability (heritability). Possible values for these factors and the number of combinations of the factor levels that influence the performance of GP methods can be large. Thus, efficient methods for identifying combinations of factor levels that produce most accurate GPs is needed. Herein, we employ response surface methods (RSMs) to find the experimental conditions that produce the most accurate GPs. We illustrate RSM with an example of simulated doubled haploid populations and identify the combination of factors that maximize the difference between prediction accuracies of best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) and support vector machine (SVM) GP methods. The greatest impact on the response is due to the genetic architecture of the population, heritability of the trait, and the sample size. When epistasis is responsible for all of the genotypic variance and heritability is equal to one and the sample size of the training population is large, the advantage of using the SVM method vs. the BLUP method is greatest. However, except for values close to the maximum, most of the response surface shows little difference between the methods. We also determined that the conditions resulting in the greatest prediction accuracy for BLUP occurred when genetic architecture consists solely of additive effects, and heritability is equal to one.
Reference Key
howard2017g3:application Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Réka Howard;Alicia L. Carriquiry;William D. Beavis
Journal separation and purification technology
Year 2017
DOI
10.1534/g3.117.044453
URL
http://g3journal.org/lookup/doi/10.1534/g3.117.044453
Keywords
Machine learning genomic prediction mixed models epistasisgenetics

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.