A comparison of accuracy validation methods for genomic and pedigree-based predictions of swine litter size traits...

The objective of this study was to compare and determine the optimal validation method when comparing accuracy from single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP) to traditional pedigree-based BLUP. Field data included six litter size traits. Simulated data included ten replicates designed to mimic the field data in order to determine the method that was closest to the true accuracy. Data were split into training and validation sets. The methods used were as follows: (i) theoretical accuracy derived from the prediction error variance (PEV) of the direct inverse (iLHS), (ii) approximated accuracies from the accf90(GS) program in the BLUPF90 family of programs (Approx), (iii) correlation between predictions and the single-step GEBVs from the full data set (GEBV_Full ), (iv) correlation between predictions and the corrected phenotypes of females from the full data set (Y_c ), (v) correlation from method iv divided by the square root of the heritability (Y_ch ) and (vi) correlation between sire predictions and the average of their daughters' corrected phenotypes (Y_cs ). Accuracies from iLHS increased from 0.27 to 0.37 (37%) in the Large White. Approximation accuracies were very consistent and close in absolute value (0.41 to 0.43). Both iLHS and Approx were much less variable than the corrected phenotype methods (ranging from 0.04 to 0.27). On average, simulated data showed an increase in accuracy from 0.34 to 0.44 (29%) using ssGBLUP. Both iLHS and Y_ch approximated the increase well, 0.30 to 0.46 and 0.36 to 0.45, respectively. GEBV_Full performed poorly in both data sets and is not recommended. Results suggest that for within-breed selection, theoretical accuracy using PEV was consistent and accurate. When direct inversion is infeasible to get the PEV, correlating predictions to the corrected phenotypes divided by the square root of heritability is adequate given a large enough validation data set.