Animal Bioscience

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparing genomic studies in animal breeding and human genetics: focus on disease-related traits in livestock - A review

  • Received : 2024.07.11
  • Accepted : 2024.09.05
  • Published : 2025.02.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Genomic studies of diseases can be divided into two types: i) analyses that reveal causal genes by focusing on linkage disequilibrium between observed and causal variants and ii) those that simultaneously assess numerous genetic markers to estimate the polygenic effects of a particular genomic region or entire genome. The field of human genetics has emphasized the discovery of causal genes, but these represent only a fraction of the total genetic variance. Therefore, alternative approaches, such as the polygenic risk score, which estimates the genetic risk for a given trait or disease based on all genetic markers (rather than on known causal variants only), have begun to garner attention. In many respects, these human genetic methods are similar to those originally developed for the estimation of breeding values (i.e., total additive genetic effects) in livestock. However, despite these similarities in methods, the fields of human and animal genetics still differ markedly in terms of research objectives, target populations, and other characteristics. For example, livestock populations have continually been selected and inbred throughout their history; consequently, their effective population size has shrunk and preferred genes (such as those influencing disease resistance and production traits) have accumulated in the modern breeding populations. By examining the characteristics of these two fields, particularly from the perspectives of disease and disease resistance, this review aims to improve understanding of the intrinsic differences between genomic studies using human compared with livestock populations.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by the College of International Relations, Nihon University, and the College of Bioresource Sciences, Nihon University.

References

  1. Georges M, Charlier C, Hayes B. Harnessing genomic information for livestock improvement. Nat Rev Genet 2019;20: 136-56. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-018-0082-2
  2. Buniello A, Jacqueline A, MacArthur L, et al. The NHGRIEBI GWAS catalog of published genome-wide association studies, targeted arrays and summary statistics 2019. Nucleic Acids Res 2019;47:D1005-12. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky1120
  3. Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 2001;157:1819-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819
  4. Maher B. Personal genomes: the case of the missing heritability. Nature 2008;456:18-21. https://doi.org/10.1038/456018a
  5. Yang J, Benyamin B, McEvoy BP, et al. Common SNPs explain a large proportion of the heritability for human height. Nat Genet 2010;42:565-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.608
  6. Yang J, Bakshi A, Zhu Z, et al. Genetic variance estimation with imputed variants finds negligible missing heritability for human height and body mass index. Nat Genet 2015; 47:1114-20. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3390
  7. Nagamine Y, Pong-Wong R, Navarro P, et al. Localising loci underlying complex trait variation using regional genomic relationship mapping. PLoS One 2012;7:e46501. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0046501
  8. Henderson CR. A simple method for computing the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in prediction of breeding values. Biometrics 1976;32:69-83. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529339
  9. Gervais O, Pong-Wong R, Navarro P, et al. Antagonistic genetic correlations for milking traits within the genome of dairy cattle. PLoS One 2017;12:e0175105. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175105
  10. Gervais O, Ueno K, Kawai Y, et al. Regional heritability mapping identifies several novel loci (STAT4, ULK4, and KCNH5) for primary biliary cholangitis in the Japanese population. Eur J Hum Genet 2021;29:1282-91. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-021-00854-5
  11. Canela-Xandri O, Law A, Gray A, Woolliams JA, Tenesa A. A new tool called DISSECT for analysing large genomic data sets using a big data approach. Nat Commun 2015;6: 10162. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10162
  12. Aulchenko YS, Ripke S, Isaacs A, van Duijn CM. GenABEL: an R library for genome-wide association analysis. Bioinformatics 2007;23:1294-96. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btm108
  13. Garrick DJ. Equivalent mixed model equations for genomic selection. J Anim Sci 2007;85:376.
  14. Van Raden PM, Tooker ME. Methods to explain genomic estimates of breeding value. J Dairy Sci 2007;90(Suppl.1):374.
  15. VanRaden PM. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J Dairy Sci 2008;91:4414-23. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0980
  16. Zhang Z, Todhunter RJ, Buckler ES, Vleck LDV. Technical note: use of marker-based relationships with multiple-trait derivative-free restricted maximal likelihood. J Anim Sci 2007;85:881-5. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-656
  17. Legarra A, Aguilar I, Misztal I. A relationship matrix including full pedigree and genomic information. J Dairy Sci 2009;92: 4656-63. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2061
  18. Christensen, OF, Lund MS. Genomic prediction when some animals are not genotyped. Genet Sel Evol 2010;42:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-42-2
  19. Ciepłoch A, Rutkowska K, Oprządek J, Polawska E. Genetic disorders in beef cattle: a review. Genes Genomics 2017;39: 461-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13258-017-0525-8
  20. Andersson L, Haley CS, Ellegren H, et al. Genetic mapping of quantitative trait loci for growth and fatness in pigs. Science 1994;263:1771-4. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.8134840
  21. Haley CS, Knott SA. A simple regression method for mapping quantitative trait loci in line crosses using flanking markers. Heredity 1992;69:315-24. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1992.131
  22. Nagamine Y, Haley CS, Sewalem A, Visscher PM. Quantitative trait loci variation for growth and obesity between and within lines of pigs (Sus scrofa). Genetics 2003;164:629-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/164.2.629
  23. Nagamine Y, Visscher PM, Haley CS. QTL detection and allelic effects for growth and fat traits in outbred pig populations. Genet Sel Evol 2004;36:83. https://doi.org/10.1051/gse:2003052
  24. Falconer DS. Introduction to quantitative genetics. Oliver and Boyd. London, UK: Edinburgh University; 1960.
  25. Li Y, Willer C, Sanna S, Abecasis G. Genotype Imputation. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 2009;10:387-406. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.164242
  26. Kabisch, M, Hamann U, Bermejo JL. Imputation of missing genotypes within LD-blocks relying on the basic coalescent and beyond: consideration of population growth and structure. BMC Genomics 2017;18:798. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-017-4208-2
  27. Sham PC, Cherny SS, Purcell S, Hewitt JK. Power of linkage versus association analysis of quantitative traits, by use of variance-components models, for sibship data. Am J Hum Genet 2000;66:1616-30. https://doi.org/10.1086/302891
  28. Visscher PM, Wray NR, Zhang Q, et al. 10 years of GWAS discovery: biology, function, and translation. Am J Hum Genet 2017;101:5-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.005
  29. Visscher PM, Brown MA, McCarthy MI, Yang J. Five years of GWAS discovery. Am J Hum Genet 2012;90:7-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.11.029
  30. Bloom JS, Boocock J, Treusch S, et al. Rare variants contribute disproportionately to quantitative trait variation in yeast. eLife 2019;8:e49212. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49212
  31. Lee S, Abecasis GR, Boehnke M, Lin X. Rare-variant association analysis: study designs and statistical tests. Am J Hum Genet 2014;95:5-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.06.009
  32. Green, E, Watson J, Collins F. Human genome project: twentyfive years of big biology. Nature 2015;526:29-31. https://doi.org/10.1038/526029a
  33. Ozaki K, Ohnishi Y, Iida A, et al. Functional SNPs in the lymphotoxin-alpha gene that are associated with susceptibility to myocardial infarction. Nat Genet 2002;32:650-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1047
  34. Sollis E, Mosaku A, Abid A, et al. The NHGRI-EBI GWAS catalog: knowledgebase and deposition resource. Nucleic Acids Res 2023;51:D977-85. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac1010
  35. Okada Y, Wu D, Trynka G, et al. Genetics of rheumatoid arthritis contributes to biology and drug discovery. Nature 2014;506:376-81. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12873
  36. Denny JC, Van Driest SL, Wei WQ, Roden DM. Influence of big (clinical) data and genomics on precision medicine and drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2018;103:40918. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.951
  37. Stark Z, Scott RH. Genomic newborn screening for rare diseases. Nat Rev Genet 2023;24:755-66. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-023-00621-w
  38. Wainschtein P, Jain D, Zheng Z, et al. Assessing the contribution of rare variants to complex trait heritability from whole-genome sequence data. Nat Genet 2022;54:263-73. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-021-00997-7
  39. Purcell SM, Wray NR, Stone JL, et al. Common polygenic variation contributes to risk of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Nature 2009;460:748-52. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08185
  40. Wray NR, Lee SH, Mehta D, Vinkhuyzen AAE, Dudbridge F, Middeldorp CM. Research review: Polygenic methods and their application to psychiatric traits. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2014;55:1068-87. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12295
  41. Kim YJ, Moon S, Hwang MY, et al. The contribution of common and rare genetic variants to variation in metabolic traits in 288,137 East Asians. Nat Commun 2022;13:6642. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-34163-2
  42. Mavaddat N, Michailidou K, Dennis J, et al. Polygenic risk scores for prediction of breast cancer and breast cancer subtypes. Am J Hum Genet 2019;104:21-34. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.002
  43. Jiao Y, Truong T, Eon-Marchais S, et al. Association and performance of polygenic risk scores for breast cancer among French women presenting or not a familial predisposition to the disease. Eur J Cancer 2023;179:76-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2022.11.007
  44. de los Campos G, Vazquez AI, Fernando R, et al. Prediction of complex human traits using the genomic best linear unbiased predictor. PLoS Genet 2013;9:e1003608. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003608
  45. Meuwissen THE. Accuracy of breeding values of 'unrelated' individuals predicted by dense SNP genotyping. Genet Sel Evol 2009;41:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-41-35
  46. Weissbrod O, Kanai M, Shi H, et al. Leveraging fine-mapping and multipopulation training data to improve cross-population polygenic risk scores. Nat Genet 2022;54:450-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-022-01036-9
  47. Wray NR, Kemper KE, Hayes BJ, Goddard M, Visscher PM. Complex trait prediction from genome data: contrasting EBV in livestock to PRS in humans. Genetics 2019;211:113141. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.119.301859
  48. Mathieson I. The omnigenic model and polygenic prediction of complex traits. Am J Hum Genet 2021;108:1558-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.07.003
  49. Pathan N, Deng WQ, Di Scipio M, et al. A method to estimate the contribution of rare coding variants to complex trait heritability. Nat Commun 2024;15:1245. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-45407-8
  50. Kadowaki H, Suzuki E, Kojima-Shibata C, et al. Selection for resistance to swine mycoplasmal pneumonia over 5 generations in landrace pigs. Livest Sci 2012;147:20-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.03.014
  51. Bermingham M, Bishop S, Woolliams J, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies novel loci associated with resistance to bovine tuberculosis. Heredity 2014;112:543-51. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2013.137
  52. Price AL, Patterson NJ, Plenge RM, Weinblatt ME, Shadick NA, Reich D. Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies. Nat Genet 2006;38:904-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1847
  53. Sved JA, Cameron EC, Gilchrist AS. Estimating effective population size from linkage disequilibrium between unlinked loci: theory and application to fruit fly outbreak populations. PLoS One 2013;8:e69078. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069078
  54. Okamura T, Onodera W, Tayama T, et al. A genome-wide scan for quantitative trait loci affecting respiratory disease and immune capacity in landrace pigs. Anim Genet 2012;43: 721-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2012.02359.x
  55. Brito LF, Bedere N, Douhard F, et al. Genetic selection of high-yielding dairy cattle toward sustainable farming systems in a rapidly changing world. Animal 2021;15:100292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100292
  56. Marees AT, De Kluiver H, Stringer S, et al. A tutorial on conducting genome‐wide association studies: quality control and statistical analysis. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res 2018;27: e1608. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1608