Genomic selection using low density marker panels with application to a sire line in pigs

Table 5 Correlations between EBV and DGV, and accuracies of DGV estimated with different methods

Trait	Cor(DGV, EBV)	Cor(DGV₁,EBV₁)	Cor(DGV, TBV)	Cor(DGV₁, TBV)	Cor(DGV₁, TBV)
Trait	Cor(DGV, EBV)	Cor(DGV₁,EBV₁)	Regression	Regression	Equation (1)
DGfield	0.52	0.26	0.45	0.28	0.28
DGstation	0.57	0.27	0.40	0.32	0.34
CLCBonn	0.68	0.42	0.46	0.49	0.62
CLCFOM	0.50	0.38	0.40	0.40	0.43
SW	0.61	0.33	0.40	0.39	0.46
BW	0.52	0.24	0.30	0.30	0.34
BLC	0.60	0.37	0.44	0.41	0.47
HW	0.58	0.36	0.38	0.42	0.49
LW	0.61	0.33	0.36	0.41	0.53
LEA	0.65	0.31	0.37	0.40	0.53
CL	0.60	0.18	0.25	0.31	0.46
pH1	0.83	0.31	0.45	0.47	(1.27)
IMF	0.70	0.18	0.28	0.35	(0.82)
Drip	0.83	0.36	0.44	0.52	(1.48)
Mean across traits 1-11	0.59	0.31	0.38	0.38	0.45

The first two columns show the correlations between conventional BLUP estimated breeding values (EBV) and direct genomic breeding values (DGV); the index 1 indicates that the parents of the individuals genotyped at high-density were considered unknown in the calculation of EBV; column 3 shows the estimated accuracies of the DGV when complete pedigrees were used; the last two columns show the estimated accuracies of the DGV when short pedigrees were used; see Table 1 for full names of traits.

ISSN: 1297-9686