Prediction of genetic value for sweet cherry fruit maturity among environments using a 6K SNP array

Abstract

The timing of fruit maturity is an important trait in sweet cherry production and breeding. Phenotypic variation for phenology of fruit maturity in sweet cherry appears to be under strong genetic control, but that control might be complicated by phenotypic instability across environments. Although such genotype-by-environment interaction (G × E) is a common phenomenon in crop plants, knowledge about it is lacking for fruit maturity timing and other sweet cherry traits. In this study, 1673 genome-wide SNP markers were used to estimate genomic relationships among 597 weakly pedigree-connected individuals evaluated over two seasons at three locations in Europe and one location in the USA, thus sampling eight ‘environments’. The combined dataset enabled a single meta-analysis to investigate the environmental stability of genomic predictions. Linkage disequilibrium among marker loci declined rapidly with physical distance, and ordination of the relationship matrix suggested no strong structure among germplasm. The most parsimonious G × E model allowed heterogeneous genetic variance and pairwise covariances among environments. Narrow-sense genomic heritability was very high (0.60–0.83), as was accuracy of predicted breeding values (>0.62). Average correlation of additive effects among environments was high (0.96) and breeding values were highly correlated across locations. Results indicated that genomic models can be used in cherry to accurately predict date of fruit maturity for untested individuals in new environments. Limited G × E for this trait indicated that phenotypes of individuals will be stable across similar environments. Equivalent analyses for other sweet cherry traits, for which multiple years of data are commonly available among breeders and cultivar testers, would be informative for predicting performance of elite selections and cultivars in new environments.

References

[1] Mattheis, J. P. & Roberts, R. G. Fumication of sweet cherry (Prunus avium Bing) fruit with low-molecualr-weight aldehydes for postharvest decay control. Plant Dis. 77, 810-814 (1993).

[2] Alique, R., Martinez, M. A. & Alonso, J. Influence of the modified atmosphere packaging on shelf life and quality of Navalinda sweet cherry. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 217, 416-420 (2003).

[3] Wani, A. A., Singh, P., Guld, K., Wani, M. H. & Langowskib, H. C. Food Packaging and Shelf-life 86-99 (2014).

[4] Kupferman, G. & Sanderson, P. Temperature management and modified atmosphere packing to preserve sweet cherry fruit quality. Acta Hortic. 667, 523-528 (2001).

[5] Webster, A. D. in Cherries: Crop Physiology, Production and Uses (eds Webster, D. A. & Looney, N. E.) (CAB International, Oxford, 1996).

[6] Iglesias, I. et al. El cultivo del cerezo en Espana: produccion, consumo e intercambios comerciales. Fruticoltura 48, 6-39 (2016).

[7] Palasciano, M . Ciliegio: tutte le varietà per i nuovi impianti. L’informatore Agrario 32, 21-24 (2015).

[8] San Martino, L., Manavella, F. A., Garcia, D. A. & Salato, G. Phenology and fruit quality of nine sweet cherry cultivars in south Patagonia. Acta Hortic. 795, 841-848 (2008).

[9] Bargioni, G. in Cherries: Crop Physiology, Production and Uses 73-112 (eds Webster, D. A. & Looney, N. E.) (CAB International, Oxford, 1996).

[10] Dirlewanger, E. et al. Comparison of the genetic determinism of two key phenological traits, flowering and maturity dates, in three Prunus species: peach, apricot and sweet cherry. Heredity 109, 280-292 (2012).

[11] Piaskowski, J. et al. Genomic heritability estimates in sweet cherry reveal non-additive genetic variance is relevant for industry-prioritized traits. BMC Genet. 19, 16 (2018).

[12] Quero-Garcia, J. et al. QTL detection of important agronomic traits for sweet cherry breeding. Acta Hortic. 1020, 57-64 (2014).

[13] Quero-García, J., Schuster, M., Lopez-Ortega, G. & Charlot, G. in Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses 60-94 (eds Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Pulawska, J. & Lang, G.) (CAB International, Wallingford, 2017).

[14] Iezzoni, A. et al. in Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses 35-59 (eds Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Pulawska, J. & Lang, G.) (CAB International, Wallingford, 2017).

[15] Hrotko, K. & Rozpara, E. in Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses (eds Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Pulawska, J. & Lang, G.) (CAB International, Wallingford, 2017).

[16] Sansavini, S. & Lugli, S. Sweet cherry breeding programs in Europe and Asia. Acta Hortic. 795, 41-58 (2008).

[17] Choi, C. & Kappel, F. Inbreeding, coancestry, and founding clones of sweet cherries from North America. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 129, 535-543 (2004).

[18] Iezzoni, A., Schmidt, H. & Albertini, A. in Genetic Resources of Temperate Fruit and Nut Crops Vol. 1, 111-173 (eds Moore, J. N. & Ballington Jr, J. R.) (ISHS, Wageningen, 1990).

[19] Allard, R. W. & Bradshaw, A. D. Implications of genotype-environment interaction in applied plant breeding. Crop Sci. 4, 503-508 (1964).

[20] Cooper, M. & Delacy, I. H. Relationships among analytical methods used to study genotypic varaition and genotype-by-environment interaction in plant-breeding multi-environment experiements. Theor. Appl. Genet. 88, 561-572 (1994).

[21] Matheson, A. C. & Cotterill, P. P. Utility of genotype × environment interactions. For. Ecol. Manag. 30, 159-174 (1990).

[22] Hardner, C. M., Evans, K., Brien, C., Bliss, F. & Peace, C. Genetic architecture of apple fruit quality traits following storage and implications for genetic improvement. Tree Genet Genomes 12 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-016-0977-z.

[23] Miller, S. et al. Performance of apple cultivars in the 1995 NE-183 regional project planting: III. Fruit sensory characteristics. J. Am. Pomol. Soc. 59, 28-43 (2005).

[24] Miller, S. et al. Performance of apple cultivars in the 1995 NE-183 regional project planting: II. Fruit quality characteristics. J. Am. Pomol. Soc. 58, 65-77 (2004).

[25] Miller, S. S. et al. Effect of cultivar and site on fruit quality as demonstrated by the NE-183 regional project on apple cultivars. Horttechnology 15, 886-895 (2005).

[26] Hardner, C. M., Bally, I. S. E. & Wright, C. L. Prediction of breeding values for average fruit weight in mango using a multivariate individual mixed model. Euphytica 186, 463-477 (2012).

[27] Falconer, D. S. The problem of environment and selection. Am. Nat. 86, 293-298 (1952).

[28] Burdon, R. D. Genetic correlation as a concept for studying genotype-environment interaction in forest tree breeding. Silvae Genet. 26, 168-175 (1977).

[29] Henderson, C. R. Best linear unbiased prediction of breeding values not in model for records. J. Dairy Sci. 60, 783-787 (1977).

[30] Smith, A. B., Cullis, B. R. & Thompson, R. The analysis of crop cultivar breeding and evaluation trials: an overview of current mixed model approaches. J. Agric. Sci. 143, 449-462 (2005).

[31] Smith, A., Cullis, B. & Thompson, R. Analyzing variety by environment data using multiplicative mixed models and adjustments for spatial field trend. Biometrics 57, 1138-1147 (2001).

[32] Kelly, A. M., Smith, A. B., Eccleston, J. A. & Cullis, B. R. The accuracy of varietal selection using factor analytic models for multi-environment plant breeding trials. Crop Sci. 47, 1063-1070 (2007).

[33] Hardner, C. M., Dieters, M., Dale, G., DeLacy, I. & Basford, K. E. Patterns of genotype-by-environment interaction in diameter at breast height at age 3 for eucalypt hybrid clones grown for reafforestation of lands affected by salinity. Tree Genet. Genomes 6, 833-851 (2010).

[34] Arief, V. N. et al. Evaluating testing strategies for plant breeding field trials: redesigning a CIMMYT International Wheat Nursery. Crop Sci. 55, 164-177 (2015).

[35] VanRaden, P. M. Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. J. Dairy Sci. 91, 4414-4423 (2008).

[36] Hayes, B. J., Visscher, P. M. & Goddard, M. E. Increased accuracy of artificial selection by using the realized relationship matrix. Genet. Res. 91, 47-60 (2009).

[37] Visscher, P. M., Hill, W. G. & Wray, N. R. Heritability in the genomics era - concepts and misconceptions. Nat. Rev. Genet. 9, 255-266 (2008).

[38] Speed, D. & Balding, D. J. Relatedness in the post-genomic era: is it still useful?. Nat. Rev. Genet. 16, 33-44 (2015).

[39] Burgueno, J., de los Campos, G., Weigel, K. & Crossa, J. Genomic prediction of breeding values when modeling genotype x environment interaction using pedigree and dense molecular markers. Crop Sci. 52, 707-719 (2012).

[40] Campoy, J. A. et al. Genetic diversity, linkage disequilibrium, population structure and construction of a core collection of Prunus avium L. landraces and bred cultivars. BMC Plant Biol. 16, 15 (2016).

[41] Meier, U. et al. Phänologische entwicklungsstadien des kernobstes (Malus domestica Borkh. und Pyrus communis L.), des Steinobstes (Prunus-Arten), der Johnnisbeere (Ribes-Arten) und der Erdbeere (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.). Nachr. Dtsch. Pflanzenschutzd. 46, 141-153 (1994).

[42] Peace, C. P., Luby, J. J., van de Weg, W. E., Bink, M. C. A. M. & Lezzoni, A. F. A strategy for developing representative germplasm sets for systematic QTL validation, demonstrated for apple, peach, and sweet cherry. Tree Genet. Genomes 1-16 (2014) Tree Genet. Genomes 10: 1-16.

[43] Chavoshi, M. et al. Phenotyping protocol for sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) to facilitate an understanding of trait inheritance. J. Am. Pomol. Soc. 68, 125-134 (2014).

[44] Lezzoni, A. et al. RosBREED: enabling marker-assisted breeding in Rosaceae. Acta Hortic. 859, 389-394 (2010).

[45] Peace, C. et al. Development and evaluation of a genome-wide 6K SNP array for diploid sweet cherry and tetraploid sour cherry. PLoS ONE 7, 48305 (2012).

[46] GenomeStudio Genotyping Module v1.0, User Guide (Illumina Inc., San Diego, 2010).

[47] Di Guardo, M. et al. ASSIsT: an automatic SNP scoring tool for in- and out-breeding species. Bioinformatics 31, 3873-3874 (2015).

[48] Bink, M. et al. Bayesian QTL analyses using pedigreed families of an out-crossing species, with application to fruit firmness in apple. Theor. Appl. Genet. 127, 1073-1090 (2014).

[49] Voorrips, R. E., Bink, M., Kruisselbrink, J. W., Koehorst-van Putten, H. J. J. & van de Weg, W. E. PediHaplotyper: software for consistent assignment of marker haplotypes in pedigrees. Mol. Breed. 36, 10 (2016).

[50] Browning, S. R. & Browning, B. L. Rapid and accurate haplotype phasing and missing-data inference for whole-genome association studies by use of localized haplotype clustering. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 1084-1097 (2007).

[51] Browning, B. L. & Browning, S. R. Improving the accuracy and efficiency of identity-by-descent detection in population data. Genetics 194, 459 (2013).

[52] Wimmer, V., Albrecht, T., Auinger, H. J. & Schon, C. C. synbreed: a framework for the analysis of genomic prediction data using R. Bioinformatics 28, 2086-2087 (2012).

[53] Brien, C. J. & Demetrio, C. G. B. Using the randomisation in specifying the ANOVA model and table for properly and improperly replicated grazing trials. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 38, 325-334 (1998).

[54] Gilmour, A. R., Gogel, B., Cullis, B. R. & Thompson, R. ASReml User Guide Release 3.0 (VSN International Ltd, Hemel Hempstead, 2009).

[55] Henderson, C. R. Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31, 423-447 (1975).

[56] Chang, C. C. et al. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience 4, 16 (2015).

[57] Guajardo, V. et al. Construction of high density sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) linkage maps using microsatellite markers and SNPs detected by genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS). PLoS ONE 10, 17 (2015).

[58] Fisher, R. A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers (Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh 1954).

[59] Vanderzande, S., Micheletti, D., Troggio, M., Davey, M. W. & Keulemans, J. Genetic diversity, popultion structure, and linkage disequilibrium of elite and local apple accessions from Belgium using the IRSC array. Tree Genet. Genomes 13 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-017-1206-0.

[60] Micheletti, D. et al. Whole-genome analysis of diversity and SNP-major gene association in peach germplasm. PLoS ONE 10, 19 (2015).

[61] Kumar, S. et al. Genomic selection for fruit quality traits in apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.). PLoS ONE 7 (2012).

[62] Mariette, S. et al. Population structure and genetic bottleneck in sweet cherry estimated with SSRs and the gametophytic self-incompatibility locus. BMC Genet. 11, 13 (2010).

[63] Bérénos, C., Ellis, P. A., Pilkington, J. G. & Pemberton, J. M. Estimating quantitative genetic parameters in wild populations: a comparison of pedigree and genomic approaches. Mol. Ecol. 23, 3434-3451 (2014).

[64] Wang, H., Misztal, I. & Legarra, A. Differences between genomic-based and pedigree-based relationships in a chicken population, as a function of quality control and pedigree links among individuals. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 131, 445-451 (2014).

[65] Sales, J. & Hill, W. G. Effect of sampling errors on efficiency of selection indexes 1. Use of information from relatives for single trait improvement. Animal Production. Anim. Sci. 22, 1-17 (1976).

[66] Klápste, J., Lstibúrek, M. & El-Kassaby, Y. A. Estimates of genetic parameters and breeding values from western larch open-pollinated families using marker-based relationship. Tree Genet. Genomes 10, 241-249 (2014).

[67] Gauch, H. G. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci. 46, 1488-1500 (2006).

[68] Resende, M. V. D. & Thompson, R. Factor analytic multiplicative mixed models in the analysis of multiple experiments. Rev. Mat. Estat. 22, 31-52 (2004).

[69] Henderson, C. R. Best linear unbaised prediction of nonadditive genetic merits on noninbred populations. J. Anim. Sci. 60, 111-117 (1985) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036674.

[70] de Boer, I. J. M. & van Arendonk, J. A. M. Prediction of additive and dominance effects in selected or unselected popultions with inbreeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 84, 451-459 (1992).

[71] Denis, M. & Bouvet, J. M. Efficiency of genomic selection with models including dominance effect in the context of eucalyptus breeding. Tree Genet. Genomes 9, 37-51 (2013).

[72] Kumar, S. et al. Genome-enabled estimates of additive and nonadditive genetic variances and prediction of apple phenotypes across environments. G3 Genes Genomes Genet. 5, 2711-2718 (2015).

[73] Hardner, C. M., Healey, A. L., Downes, G., Herberling, M. & Gore, P. L. Improving prediction accuracy and selection of open-pollinated seed-lots in Eucalyptus dunnii maiden using a multivariate mixed model approach. Ann. For. Sci. 73, 1035-1046 (2016).

[74] Thompson, R. & Meyer, K. A review of theoretical aspects in the estimation of breeding values for multi-trait selection. Livest. Prod. Sci. 15, 299-313 (1986).

[75] Oakey, H. et al. Genomic selection in multi-environment crop trials. G3 Genes Genomes Genet. 6, 1313-1326 (2016).

[76] Welham, S. J., Gogel, B. J., Smith, A. B., Thompson, R. & Cullis, B. R. A comparison of analysis methods for late stage variety evaluation trials. Aust. N. Z. J. Stat. 52, 125-149 (2010).

[77] de los Campos, G., Hickey, J. M., Pong-Wong, R., Daetwyler, H. D. & Calus, M. P. L. Whole-genome regression and prediction methods applied to plant and animal breeding. Genetics 193, 327-345 (2013).

[78] Biscarini, F. et al. Genome-enabled predictions for fruit weight and quality from repeated records in European peach progenies. BMC Genomics. 18, 15 (2017).

[79] Muranty, H. et al. Accuracy and responses of genomic selection on key traits in apple breeding. Hortic. Res. 2, 12 (2015).

[80] Habier, D., Fernando, R. L. & Dekkers, J. C. M. The impact of genetic relationship information on genome-assisted breeding values. Genetics 177, 2389-2397 (2007).

[81] Munoz, P. R. et al. Unraveling additive from nonadditive effects using genomic relationship matrices. Genetics 198, 1759-1768 (2014).

[82] Melchinger, A. E. Means, variance, and covariances between relatives in hybrid populations with disequilibrium in parent popultions. In Proc. 2nd Interntional Conference on Quantitative Genetics (eds. Weir, B. S., Eisen, E. J. & Goodman, M. M.) 400-415 (Sinauer, Sunderland, 1988).

[83] Li, Y. J., Suontama, M., Burdon, R. D. & Dungey, H. S. Genotype by environment interactions in forest tree breeding: review of methodology and perspectives on research and application. Tree Genet. Genomes 13, 18 (2017).

[84] Technow, F., Messina, C. D., Totir, L. R. & Cooper, M. Integrating crop growth models with whole genome prediction through approximate Bayesian computation. PLoS ONE 10, 20 (2015).

[85] van Eeuwijk, F. A., Bustos-Korts, D. V. & Malosetti, M. What should students in plant breeding know about the statistical aspects of genotype × environment interactions?. Crop Sci. 56, 2119-2140 (2016).