Efficient genome-wide genotyping strategies and data integration in crop plants
Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has revolutionized plant and animal research by providing powerful genotyping methods. This review describes and discusses the advantages, challenges and, most importantly, solutions to facilitate data processing, the handling of missing data, and cross-platform data integration.
Next-generation sequencing technologies provide powerful and flexible genotyping methods to plant breeders and researchers. These methods offer a wide range of applications from genome-wide analysis to routine screening with a high level of accuracy and reproducibility. Furthermore, they provide a straightforward workflow to identify, validate, and screen genetic variants in a short time with a low cost. NGS-based genotyping methods include whole-genome re-sequencing, SNP arrays, and reduced representation sequencing, which are widely applied in crops. The main challenges facing breeders and geneticists today is how to choose an appropriate genotyping method and how to integrate genotyping data sets obtained from various sources. Here, we review and discuss the advantages and challenges of several NGS methods for genome-wide genetic marker development and genotyping in crop plants. We also discuss how imputation methods can be used to both fill in missing data in genotypic data sets and to integrate data sets obtained using different genotyping tools. It is our hope that this synthetic view of genotyping methods will help geneticists and breeders to integrate these NGS-based methods in crop plant breeding and research.
The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support received from Génome Québec, Genome Canada, the Government of Canada, the Ministère de l’Économie, Science et Innovation du Québec, Semences Prograin Inc., Syngenta Canada Inc., Sevita Genetics, Coop Fédérée, Grain Farmers of Ontario, Saskatchewan Pulse Growers, Manitoba Pulse and Soybean Growers, the Canadian Field Crop Research Alliance and Producteurs de grains du Québec.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
- Bukowski R, Guo X, Lu Y, Zou C, He B, Rong Z et al (2015) Construction of the third generation Zea mays haplotype map. bioRxivGoogle Scholar
- Hedrick P (2011) Genetics of populations, 4th edn. Jones & Bartlett Learning Press, Boston. ISBN 978-0-7637-5737-3Google Scholar
- Hormozdiari F, Hajirasouliha IAM, Eichler EE, Sahinalp SC (2011) Simultaneous structural variation discovery in multiple paired-end sequenced genomes. In: Proceedings of RECOMBGoogle Scholar
- Howie B, Marchini J, Stephens M (2011) Genotype imputation with thousands of genomes. G3: genes. Genom Gene 6:457–470Google Scholar
- Li Y, Willer C, Sanna S (2009b) Genotype imputation. Annu Rev Genom Hum Genet 10:387–406. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.164242 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mascher M, Wu S, Amand PS, Stein N, Poland J (2013a) Application of genotyping-by-sequencing on semiconductor sequencing platforms: a comparison of genetic and reference-based marker ordering in barley. PLoS ONE 8(10):e76925. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076925 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Nishida H, Yoshida T, Kawakami K, Fujita M, Long B, Akashi Y, Laurie DA, Kato K (2013) Structural variation in the 5′ upstream region of photoperiod-insensitive alleles Ppd-A1a and Ppd-B1a identified in hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and their effect on heading time. Mol Breed 31:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rosato C, Etter P, Kamps-Hughes N, Johnson E (2012) Genotyping on high throughput sequencers: preparation and analysis of reduced representation genomic libraries. J Biomol Tech JBT 23(Suppl):S20Google Scholar
- Torkamaneh D, Laroche J, Tardivel A, O’Donoughue L, Cober E, Rajcan I, Belzile F (2017b) Comprehensive description of genome-wide nucleotide and structural variation in short-season soybean. Plant Biotechnol J 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12825