Genomic prediction of blood biomarkers of metabolic disorders in Holstein cattle using parametric and nonparametric models.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic disturbances adversely impact productive and reproductive performance of dairy cattle due to changes in endocrine status and immune function, which increase the risk of disease. This may occur in the post-partum phase, but also throughout lactation, with sub-clinical symptoms. Recently, increased attention has been directed towards improved health and resilience in dairy cattle, and genomic selection (GS) could be a helpful tool for selecting animals that are more resilient to metabolic disturbances throughout lactation. Hence, we evaluated the genomic prediction of serum biomarkers levels for metabolic distress in 1353 Holsteins genotyped with the 100K single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) chip assay. The GS was evaluated using parametric models best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), Bayesian B (BayesB), elastic net (ENET), and nonparametric models, gradient boosting machine (GBM) and stacking ensemble (Stack), which combines ENET and GBM approaches.

RESULTS: The results show that the Stack approach outperformed other methods with a relative difference (RD), calculated as an increment in prediction accuracy, of approximately 18.0% compared to GBLUP, 12.6% compared to BayesB, 8.7% compared to ENET, and 4.4% compared to GBM. The highest RD in prediction accuracy between other models with respect to GBLUP was observed for haptoglobin (hapto) from 17.7% for BayesB to 41.2% for Stack; for Zn from 9.8% (BayesB) to 29.3% (Stack); for ceruloplasmin (CuCp) from 9.3% (BayesB) to 27.9% (Stack); for ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) from 8.0% (BayesB) to 40.0% (Stack); and for total protein (PROTt) from 5.7% (BayesB) to 22.9% (Stack). Using a subset of top SNPs (1.5k) selected from the GBM approach improved the accuracy for GBLUP from 1.8 to 76.5%. However, for the other models reductions in prediction accuracy of 4.8% for ENET (average of 10 traits), 5.9% for GBM (average of 21 traits), and 6.6% for Stack (average of 16 traits) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the Stack approach was more accurate in predicting metabolic disturbances than GBLUP, BayesB, ENET, and GBM and seemed to be competitive for predicting complex phenotypes with various degrees of mode of inheritance, i.e. additive and non-additive effects. Selecting markers based on GBM improved accuracy of GBLUP.