How accurate are the marker orders in crop linkage maps generated from large marker datasets?

Marker ordering during linkage map construction is a critical component of QTL mapping research. In recent years, high-throughput genotyping methods have become widely used, and these methods may generate hundreds of markers for a single mapping population. This poses problems for linkage analysis software because the number of possible marker orders increases exponentially as the number of markers increases. In this paper, we tested the accuracy of linkage analyses on simulated recombinant inbred line data using the commonly used Map Manager QTX (Manly et al. 2001: Mammalian Genome 12, 930-932) software and RECORD (Van Os et al. 2005: Theoretical and Applied Genetics 112, 30-40). Accuracy was measured by calculating two scores: % correct marker positions, and a novel, weighted rank-based score derived from the sum of absolute values of true minus observed marker ranks divided by the total number of markers. The accuracy of maps generated using Map Manager QTX was considerably lower than those generated using RECORD. Differences in linkage maps were often observed when marker ordering was performed several times using the identical dataset. In order to test the effect of reducing marker numbers on the stability of marker order, we pruned marker datasets focusing on regions consisting of tightly linked clusters of markers, which included redundant markers. Marker pruning improved the accuracy and stability of linkage maps because a single unambiguous marker order was produced that was consistent across replications of analysis. Marker pruning was also applied to a real barley mapping population and QTL analysis was performed using different map versions produced by the different programs. While some QTLs were identified with both map versions, there were large differences in QTL mapping results. Differences included maximum LOD and R-2 values at QTL peaks and map positions, thus highlighting the importance of marker order for QTL mapping

Correlation between NIRS generated and chemically measured feed quality data in barley (Hordeum vulgare), and potential use in QTL analysis identification

A study was performed to investigate the value of near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) as an alternate method to analytical techniques for identifying QTL associated with feed quality traits. Milled samples from an F6-derived recombinant inbred Tallon/Scarlett population were incubated in the rumen of fistulated cattle, recovered, washed and dried to determine the in-situ dry matter digestibility (DMD). Both pre- and post-digestion samples were analysed using NIRS to quantify key quality components relating to acid detergent fibre, starch and protein. This phenotypic data was used to identify trait associated QTL and compare them to previously identified QTL. Though a number of genetic correlations were identified between the phenotypic data sets, the only correlation of most interest was between DMD and starch digested (r = -0.382). The significance of this genetic correlation was that the NIRS data set identified a putative QTL on chromosomes 7H (LOD = 3.3) associated with starch digested. A QTL for DMD occurred in the same region of chromosome 7H, with flanking markers fAG/CAT63 and bPb-0758. The significant correlation and identification of this putative QTL, highlights the potential of technologies like NIRS in QTL analysis.

Methods to determine resistance to anthelmintics when continuing larval development occurs

The in vivo faecal egg count reduction test (FECRT) is the most commonly used test to detect anthelmintic resistance (AR) in gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN) of ruminants in pasture based systems. However, there are several variations on the method, some more appropriate than others in specific circumstances. While in some cases labour and time can be saved by just collecting post-drench faecal worm egg counts (FEC) of treatment groups with controls, or pre- and post-drench FEC of a treatment group with no controls, there are circumstances when pre- and post-drench FEC of an untreated control group as well as from the treatment groups are necessary. Computer simulation techniques were used to determine the most appropriate of several methods for calculating AR when there is continuing larval development during the testing period, as often occurs when anthelmintic treatments against genera of GIN with high biotic potential or high re-infection rates, such as Haemonchus contortus of sheep and Cooperia punctata of cattle, are less than 100% efficacious. Three field FECRT experimental designs were investigated: (I) post-drench FEC of treatment and controls groups, (II) pre- and post-drench FEC of a treatment group only and (III) pre- and post-drench FEC of treatment and control groups. To investigate the performance of methods of indicating AR for each of these designs, simulated animal FEC were generated from negative binominal distributions with subsequent sampling from the binomial distributions to account for drench effect, with varying parameters for worm burden, larval development and drench resistance. Calculations of percent reductions and confidence limits were based on those of the Standing Committee for Agriculture (SCA) guidelines. For the two field methods with pre-drench FEC, confidence limits were also determined from cumulative inverse Beta distributions of FEC, for eggs per gram (epg) and the number of eggs counted at detection levels of 50 and 25. Two rules for determining AR: (1) %reduction (%R) < 95% and lower confidence limit <90%; and (2) upper confidence limit <95%, were also assessed. For each combination of worm burden, larval development and drench resistance parameters, 1000 simulations were run to determine the number of times the theoretical percent reduction fell within the estimated confidence limits and the number of times resistance would have been declared. When continuing larval development occurs during the testing period of the FECRT, the simulations showed AR should be calculated from pre- and post-drench worm egg counts of an untreated control group as well as from the treatment group. If the widely used resistance rule 1 is used to assess resistance, rule 2 should also be applied, especially when %R is in the range 90 to 95% and resistance is suspected.