Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Methods for Genomic Selection of Traits with Additive and Epistatic Genetic Architectures

Date
2014-06-01
Authors
Howard, Reka
Carriquiry, Alicia
Carriquiry, Alicia
Beavis, William
Major Professor
Advisor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Altmetrics
Authors
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Statistics
Organizational Unit
Journal Issue
Series
Department
Statistics
Abstract

Parametric and nonparametric methods have been developed for purposes of predicting phenotypes. These methods are based on retrospective analyses of empirical data consisting of genotypic and phenotypic scores. Recent reports have indicated that parametric methods are unable to predict phenotypes of traits with known epistatic genetic architectures. Herein, we review parametric methods including least squares regression, ridge regression, Bayesian ridge regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), Bayesian LASSO, best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP), Bayes A, Bayes B, Bayes C, and Bayes Cp. We also review nonparametric methods including Nadaraya-Watson estimator, reproducing kernel Hilbert space, support vector machine regression, and neural networks. We assess the relative merits of these 14 methods in terms of accuracy and mean squared error (MSE) using simulated genetic architectures consisting of completely additive or two-way epistatic interactions in an F2 population derived from crosses of inbred lines. Each simulated genetic architecture explained either 30% or 70% of the phenotypic variability. The greatest impact on estimates of accuracy and MSE was due to genetic architecture. Parametric methods were unable to predict phenotypic values when the underlying genetic architecture was based entirely on epistasis. Parametric methods were slightly better than nonparametric methods for additive genetic architectures. Distinctions among parametric methods for additive genetic architectures were incremental. Heritability, i.e., proportion of phenotypic variability, had the second greatest impact on estimates of accuracy and MSE.

Comments

This article is from G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics 4 (2014): 1027, doi: 10.1534/g3.114.010298. Posted with permission.

Description
Keywords
Citation
DOI
Collections