Skip to main content
Fig. 2 | Genetics Selection Evolution

Fig. 2

From: Simulation studies to optimize genomic selection in honey bees

Fig. 2

Pathway-model of pedigree-based selection (a) and genomic preselection of queens (b) in year 9 as an example. a In year 8, the top 50 of the 2-year-old breeding queens (BQ) were selected as dams of drone-producing queens (DPQ; selection intensity \({i}_{DPQ}^{CBS}=2.06\)). 400 DPQ were reared in year 8 and deployed on 50 mating stations in year 9. In the same year, the top 200 of the 2-year-old BQ were selected as dams of BQ (selection intensity \({i}_{BQ}^{CBS}=1.40\)), and 1000 BQ were reared from them. The new BQ were mated on the 50 mating stations. b From the 50 dams of DPQ, \({N}_{DPQ}^{GPS}\)= 30 were chosen for preselection based on genomic estimated breeding values (EBV, \({p}_{DPQ}\)= 0.6), and each produced \({n}_{DPQ}^{GPS}\)= 16 candidate DPQ. The 240 candidate DPQ with the highest genomic EBV were selected as DPQ. Each group of eight DPQ was deployed on a separate mating station. From the 20 dams of DPQ not chosen for preselection, 160 DPQ were reared and groups of eight sister DPQ were deployed on mating stations. From the 200 dams of BQ, \({N}_{BQ}^{GPS}\)= 50 were chosen for preselection based on genomic EBV and each produced \({n}_{BQ}^{GPS}\)= 10 daughters. The 250 candidate BQ with the highest genomic EBV were selected to be mated and later phenotyped. This left \({N}_{rest}\)= 20 open slots to genotype more phenotyped BQ. Consequently, the proportion of BQ in the reference population per year was \({p}_{ref}\)= 0.27

Back to article page