Ignacio Aguilar

Dr. Ignacio Aguilar

Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria, Montevideo, Uruguay
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2010 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
DJD.L. Johnson
D.L. Johnson
ALA. Legarra
A. Legarra
STS. Tsuruta
S. Tsuruta
TLT.J. Lawlor
T.J. Lawlor
The first national single-step, full-information (phenotype, pedigree, and marker genotype) genetic evaluation was developed for final score of US Holsteins. Data included final scores recorded from 1955 to 2009 for 6,232,548 Holsteins cows. BovineSNP50 (Illumina, San Diego, CA) genotypes from the Cooperative Dairy DNA Repository (Beltsville, MD) were available for 6,508 bulls. Three analyses used a repeatability animal model as currently used for the national US evaluation. The first 2 analyses used final scores recorded up to 2004. The first analysis used only a pedigree-based relationship matrix. The second analysis used a relationship matrix based on both pedigree and genomic information (single-step approach). The third analysis used the complete data set and only the pedigree-based relationship matrix. The fourth analysis used predictions from the first analysis (final scores up to 2004 and only a pedigree-based relationship matrix) and prediction using a genomic based matrix to obtain genetic evaluation (multiple-step approach). Different allele frequencies were tested in construction of the genomic relationship matrix. Coefficients of determination between predictions of young bulls from parent average, single-step, and multiple-step approaches and their 2009 daughter deviations were 0.24, 0.37 to 0.41, and 0.40, respectively. The highest coefficient of determination for a single-step approach was observed when using a genomic relationship matrix with assumed allele frequencies of 0.5. Coefficients for regression of 2009 daughter deviations on parent-average, single-step, and multiple-step predictions were 0.76, 0.68 to 0.79, and 0.86, respectively, which indicated some inflation of predictions. The single-step regression coefficient could be increased up to 0.92 by scaling differences between the genomic and pedigree-based relationship matrices with little loss in accuracy of prediction. One complete evaluation took about 2h of computing time and 2.7 gigabytes of memory. Computing times for single-step analyses were slightly longer (2%) than for pedigree-based analysis. A national single-step genetic evaluation with the pedigree relationship matrix augmented with genomic information provided genomic predictions with accuracy and bias comparable to multiple-step procedures and could account for any population or data structure. Advantages of single-step evaluations should increase in the future when animals are pre-selected on genotypes.

1 September 2009 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ALA. Legarra
A. Legarra
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
Dense molecular markers are being used in genetic evaluation for parts of the population. This requires a two-step procedure where pseudo-data (for instance, daughter yield deviations) are computed from full records and pedigree data and later used for genomic evaluation. This results in bias and loss of information. One way to incorporate the genomic information into a full genetic evaluation is by modifying the numerator relationship matrix. A naive proposal is to substitute the relationships of genotyped animals with the genomic relationship matrix. However, this results in incoherencies because the genomic relationship matrix includes information on relationships among ancestors and descendants. In other words, using the pedigree-derived covariance between genotyped and ungenotyped individuals, with the pretense that genomic information does not exist, leads to inconsistencies. It is proposed to condition the genetic value of ungenotyped animals on the genetic value of genotyped animals via the selection index (e.g., pedigree information), and then use the genomic relationship matrix for the latter. This results in a joint distribution of genotyped and ungenotyped genetic values, with a pedigree-genomic relationship matrix H. In this matrix, genomic information is transmitted to the covariances among all ungenotyped individuals. The matrix is (semi)positive definite by construction, which is not the case for the naive approach. Numerical examples and alternative expressions are discussed. Matrix H is suitable for iteration on data algorithms that multiply a vector times a matrix, such as preconditioned conjugated gradients.

1 February 2012 in Genetics Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HWH. Wang
H. Wang
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
ALA. Legarra
A. Legarra
WMW. M. Muir
W. M. Muir
Summary: A common problem for genome-wide association analysis (GWAS) is lack of power for detection of quantitative trait loci (QTLs) and precision for fine mapping. Here, we present a statistical method, termed single-step GBLUP (ssGBLUP), which increases both power and precision without increasing genotyping costs by taking advantage of phenotypes from other related and unrelated subjects. The procedure achieves these goals by blending traditional pedigree relationships with those derived from genetic markers, and by conversion of estimated breeding values (EBVs) to marker effects and weights. Additionally, the application of mixed model approaches allow for both simple and complex analyses that involve multiple traits and confounding factors, such as environmental, epigenetic or maternal environmental effects. Efficiency of the method was examined using simulations with 15 800 subjects, of which 1500 were genotyped. Thirty QTLs were simulated across genome and assumed heritability was 0·5. Comparisons included ssGBLUP applied directly to phenotypes, BayesB and classical GWAS (CGWAS) with deregressed proofs. An average accuracy of prediction 0·89 was obtained by ssGBLUP after one iteration, which was 0·01 higher than by BayesB. Power and precision for GWAS applications were evaluated by the correlation between true QTL effects and the sum ofmadjacent single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) effects. The highest correlations were 0·82 and 0·74 for ssGBLUP and CGWAS withm=8, and 0·83 for BayesB withm=16. Standard deviations of the correlations across replicates were several times higher in BayesB than in ssGBLUP. The ssGBLUP method with marker weights is faster, more accurate and easier to implement for GWAS applications without computing pseudo-data.

1 September 2009 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
ALA. Legarra
A. Legarra
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
Currently, genomic evaluations use multiple-step procedures, which are prone to biases and errors. A single-step procedure may be applicable when genomic predictions can be obtained by modifying the numerator relationship matrix A to H = A + A(Delta), where A(Delta) includes deviations from expected relationships. However, the traditional mixed model equations require H(-1), which is usually difficult to obtain for large pedigrees. The computations with H are feasible when the mixed model equations are expressed in an alternate form that also applies for singular H and when those equations are solved by the conjugate gradient techniques. Then the only computations involving H are in the form of Aq or A(Delta)q, where q is a vector. The alternative equations have a nonsymmetric left-hand side. Computing A(Delta)q is inexpensive when the number of nonzeros in A(Delta) is small, and the product Aq can be calculated efficiently in linear time using an indirect algorithm. Generalizations to more complicated models are proposed. The data included 10.2 million final scores on 6.2 million Holsteins and were analyzed by a repeatability model. Comparisons involved the regular and the alternative equations. The model for the second case included simulated A(Delta). Solutions were obtained by the preconditioned conjugate gradient algorithm, which works only with symmetric matrices, and by the bi-conjugate gradient stabilized algorithm, which also works with nonsymmetric matrices. The convergence rate associated with the nonsymmetric solvers was slightly better than that with the symmetric solver for the original equations, although the time per round was twice as much for the nonsymmetric solvers. The convergence rate associated with the alternative equations ranged from 2 times lower without A(Delta) to 3 times lower for the largest simulated A(Delta). When the information attributable to genomics can be expressed as modifications to the numerator relationship matrix, the proposed methodology may allow the upgrading of an existing evaluation to incorporate the genomic information.

1 February 2011 in Genetics Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ZVZ. G. Vitezica
Z. G. Vitezica
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
ALA. Legarra
A. Legarra
Summary: Prediction of genetic merit or disease risk using genetic marker information is becoming a common practice for selection of livestock and plant species. For the successful application of genome-wide marker-assisted selection (GWMAS), genomic predictions should be accurate and unbiased. The effect of selection on bias and accuracy of genomic predictions was studied in two simulated animal populations under weak or strong selection and with several heritabilities. Prediction of genetic values was by best-linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) using data either from relatives summarized in pseudodata for genotyped individuals (multiple-step method) or using all available data jointly (single-step method). The single-step method combined genomic- and pedigree-based relationship matrices. Predictions by the multiple-step method were biased. Predictions by a single-step method were less biased and more accurate but under strong selection were less accurate. When genomic relationships were shifted by a constant, the single-step method was unbiased and the most accurate. The value of that constant, which adjusts for non-random selection of genotyped individuals, can be derived analytically.

1 August 2014 in Livestock Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ALAndres Legarra
Andres Legarra
OCOle F. Christensen
Ole F. Christensen
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
IMIgnacy Misztal
Ignacy Misztal