Shogo Tsuruta

Dr. Shogo Tsuruta

Department of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, United States
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
14 July 2020 in Genes
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Daniela LourencoDaniela Lourenco
Daniela Lourenco
ALAndres Legarra
Andres Legarra
STShogo Tsuruta
Shogo Tsuruta
YMYutaka Masuda
Yutaka Masuda
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
IMIgnacy Misztal
Ignacy Misztal
Single-step genomic evaluation became a standard procedure in livestock breeding, and the main reason is the ability to combine all pedigree, phenotypes, and genotypes available into one single evaluation, without the need of post-analysis processing. Therefore, the incorporation of data on genotyped and non-genotyped animals in this method is straightforward. Since 2009, two main implementations of single-step were proposed. One is called single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ssGBLUP) and uses single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) to construct the genomic relationship matrix; the other is the single-step Bayesian regression (ssBR), which is a marker effect model. Under the same assumptions, both models are equivalent. In this review, we focus solely on ssGBLUP. The implementation of ssGBLUP into the BLUPF90 software suite was done in 2009, and since then, several changes were made to make ssGBLUP flexible to any model, number of traits, number of phenotypes, and number of genotyped animals. Single-step GBLUP from the BLUPF90 software suite has been used for genomic evaluations worldwide. In this review, we will show theoretical developments and numerical examples of ssGBLUP using SNP data from regular chips to sequence data.

1 August 2011 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
STShogo Tsuruta
Shogo Tsuruta
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
TLT.J. Lawlor
T.J. Lawlor
Currently, the USDA uses a single-trait (ST) model with several intermediate steps to obtain genomic evaluations for US Holsteins. In this study, genomic evaluations for 18 linear type traits were obtained with a multiple-trait (MT) model using a unified single-step procedure. The phenotypic type data on up to 18 traits were available for 4,813,726 Holsteins, and single nucleotide polymorphism markers from the Illumina BovineSNP50 genotyping Beadchip (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA) were available on 17,293 bulls. Genomic predictions were computed with several genomic relationship matrices (G) that assumed different allele frequencies: equal, base, current, and current scaled. Computations were carried out with ST and MT models. Procedures were compared by coefficients of determination (R(2)) and regression of 2004 prediction of bulls with no daughters in 2004 on daughter deviations of those bulls in 2009. Predictions for 2004 also included parent averages without the use of genomic information. The R(2) for parent averages ranged from 10 to 34% for ST models and from 12 to 35% for MT models. The average R(2) for all G were 34 and 37% for ST and MT models, respectively. All of the regression coefficients were <1.0, indicating that estimated breeding values in 2009 of 1,307 genotyped young bulls' parents tended to be biased. The average regression coefficients ranged from 0.74 to 0.79 and from 0.75 to 0.80 for ST and MT models, respectively. When the weight for the inverse of the numerator relationship matrix (A(-1)) for genotyped animals was reduced from 1 to 0.7, R(2) remained almost identical while the regression coefficients increased by 0.11-0.26 and 0.12-0.23 for ST and MT models, respectively. The ST models required about 5s per iteration, whereas MT models required 3 (6) min per iteration for the regular (genomic) model. The MT single-step approach is feasible for 18 linear type traits in US Holstein cattle. Accuracy for genomic evaluation increases when switching ST models to MT models. Inflation of genomic evaluations for young bulls could be reduced by choosing a small weight for the A(-1) for genotyped bulls.

2 July 2015 in Genetics Selection Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Daniela LourencoDaniela Lourenco
Daniela Lourenco
BFBreno Fragomeni
Breno Fragomeni
STShogo Tsuruta
Shogo Tsuruta
Ignacio AguilarIgnacio Aguilar
Ignacio Aguilar
BZBirgit Zumbach
Birgit Zumbach
IMIgnacy Misztal
Ignacy Misztal
As more and more genotypes become available, accuracy of genomic evaluations can potentially increase. However, the impact of genotype data on accuracy depends on the structure of the genotyped cohort. For populations such as dairy cattle, the greatest benefit has come from genotyping sires with high accuracy, whereas the benefit due to adding genotypes from cows was smaller. In broiler chicken breeding programs, males have less progeny than dairy bulls, females have more progeny than dairy cows, and most production traits are recorded for both sexes. Consequently, genotyping both sexes in broiler chickens may be more advantageous than in dairy cattle. We studied the contribution of genotypes from males and females using a real dataset with genotypes on 15 723 broiler chickens. Genomic evaluations used three training sets that included only males (4648), only females (8100), and both sexes (12 748). Realized accuracies of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) were used to evaluate the benefit of including genotypes for different training populations on genomic predictions of young genotyped chickens. Using genotypes on males, the average increase in accuracy of GEBV over pedigree-based EBV for males and females was 12 and 1 percentage points, respectively. Using female genotypes, this increase was 1 and 18 percentage points, respectively. Using genotypes of both sexes increased accuracies by 19 points for males and 20 points for females. For two traits with similar heritabilities and amounts of information, realized accuracies from cross-validation were lower for the trait that was under strong selection. Overall, genotyping males and females improves predictions of all young genotyped chickens, regardless of sex. Therefore, when males and females both contribute to genetic progress of the population, genotyping both sexes may be the best option.

1 March 2005 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
STShogo Tsuruta
Shogo Tsuruta
IMI. Misztal
I. Misztal
TLT.J. Lawlor
T.J. Lawlor
Data included 392,800 records for cows born between 1995 and 1997. Traits analyzed were milk, fat, and protein yields, somatic cell score, days open (DO), 18 linear type traits, final score, and several measures of longevity. Productive life (PL) was defined as the total number of days in milk up to 84 mo of age with a restriction of 305, 500, or 999 d per lactation (PL(305), PL(500), or PL(999), respectively). Herd life was defined as the total number of days from the first calving date to the last (culling) date. A multiple-trait sire model including the effects of registration status, herd-year, age group, month of calving and stage of lactation, sire, and residual was used for parameter estimation. The average duration of the first lactation was 365 d for survivors and 386 d for culled cows. Lactation lengths for the survivors in the next 3 parities all exceeded 330 d. Heritability estimates of between 0.08 and 0.10 were obtained for all definitions of longevity. As maximum recordable PL was increased from 305 to 999 d per lactation, the genetic correlations with milk production increased (from -0.11 to +0.14) and with DO decreased (-0.62 to -0.27). Formulas for an indirect prediction of PL from correlated traits were developed. As maximum PL per lactation was increased, little change in the weights used to predict the various measures of PL, with the exception of DO was found. As the currently used value of PL(305) does not properly account for the longer lactation lengths that are routinely occurring with today's cows, PL with longer lactations may be preferable in routine evaluation.

14 December 2018 in Genetics Selection Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AGAndre Luiz Seccatto Garcia
Andre Luiz Seccatto Garcia
BBBrian Bosworth
Brian Bosworth
GWGeoffrey Waldbieser
Geoffrey Waldbieser
IMIgnacy Misztal
Ignacy Misztal
STShogo Tsuruta
Shogo Tsuruta
Daniela LourencoDaniela Lourenco
Daniela Lourenco
Catfish farming is the largest segment of US aquaculture and research is ongoing to improve production efficiency, including genetic selection programs to improve economically important traits. The objectives of this study were to investigate the use of genomic selection to improve breeding value accuracy and to identify major single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with harvest weight and residual carcass weight in a channel catfish population. Phenotypes were available for harvest weight (n = 27,160) and residual carcass weight (n = 6020), and 36,365 pedigree records were available. After quality control, genotypes for 54,837 SNPs were available for 2911 fish. Estimated breeding values (EBV) were obtained with traditional pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) and genomic (G)EBV were estimated with single-step genomic BLUP (ssGBLUP). EBV and GEBV prediction accuracies were evaluated using different validation strategies. The ability to predict future performance was calculated as the correlation between EBV or GEBV and adjusted phenotypes. Compared to the pedigree BLUP, ssGBLUP increased predictive ability up to 28% and 36% for harvest weight and residual carcass weight, respectively; and GEBV were superior to EBV for all validation strategies tested. Breeding value inflation was assessed as the regression coefficient of adjusted phenotypes on breeding values, and the results indicated that genomic information reduced breeding value inflation. Genome-wide association studies based on windows of 20 adjacent SNPs indicated that both harvest weight and residual carcass weight have a polygenic architecture with no major SNPs (the largest SNPs explained 0.96 and 1.19% of the additive genetic variation for harvest weight and residual carcass weight respectively). Genomic evaluation improves the ability to predict future performance relative to traditional BLUP and will allow more accurate identification of genetically superior individuals within catfish families.

30 January 2020 in Journal of Animal Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Jorge HidalgoJorge Hidalgo
Jorge Hidalgo
STShogo Tsuruta
Shogo Tsuruta
DLDaniela Lourenco
Daniela Lourenco
YMYutaka Masuda
Yutaka Masuda
YHYijian Huang
Yijian Huang
IMIgnacy Misztal
Ignacy Misztal
Genomic selection increases accuracy and decreases generation interval, speeding up genetic changes in the populations. However, intensive changes caused by selection can reduce the genetic variation and can strengthen undesirable genetic correlations. The purpose of this study was to investigate changes in genetic parameters for fitness traits related with prolificacy (FT1) and litter survival (FT2 and FT3), and for growth (GT1 and GT2) traits in pigs over time. The data set contained 21,269 (FT1), 23,246 (FT2), 23,246 (FT3), 150,492 (GT1), and 150,493 (GT2) phenotypic records obtained from 2009 to 2018. The pedigree file included 369,776 animals born between 2001 and 2018, of which 39,103 were genotyped. Genetic parameters were estimated with bivariate models (FT1-GT1, FT1-GT2, FT2-GT1, FT2-GT2, FT3-GT1, and FT3-GT2) using 3-yr sliding subsets. With a Bayesian implementation using the GIBBS3F90 program computations were performed as genomic analysis (GEN) or pedigree-based analysis (PED), that is, with or without genotypes, respectively. For GEN (PED), the changes in heritability from the first to the last year interval, that is, from 2009–2011 to 2015–2018 were 8.6 to 5.6 (7.9 to 8.8) for FT1, 7.8 to 7.2 (7.7 to 10.8) for FT2, 11.4 to 7.6 (10.1 to 7.5) for FT3, 35.1 to 16.5 (32.5 to 23.7) for GT1, and 35.9 to 16.5 (32.6 to 24.1) for GT2. Differences were also observed for genetic correlations as they changed from −0.31 to −0.58 (−0.28 to −0.73) for FT1-GT1, −0.32 to −0.50 (−0.29 to −0.74) for FT1-GT2, −0.27 to −0.45 (−0.30 to −0.65) for FT2-GT1, −0.28 to −0.45 (−0.32 to −0.66) for FT2-GT2, 0.14 to 0.17 (0.11 to 0.04) for FT3-GT1, and 0.14 to 0.18 (0.11 to 0.05) for FT3-GT2. Strong selection in pigs reduced heritabilities and emphasized the antagonistic genetic relationships between fitness and growth traits. With genotypes considered, heritability estimates were smaller and genetic correlations were greater than estimates with only pedigree and phenotypes. When selection is based on genomic information, genetic parameters estimated without this information can be biased because preselection is not accounted for by the model.