Would large dataset sample size unveil the potential of deep neural networks for improved genome-enabled prediction of complex traits? The case for body weight in broilers

4Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Deep neural networks (DNN) are a particular case of artificial neural networks (ANN) composed by multiple hidden layers, and have recently gained attention in genome-enabled prediction of complex traits. Yet, few studies in genome-enabled prediction have assessed the performance of DNN compared to traditional regression models. Strikingly, no clear superiority of DNN has been reported so far, and results seem highly dependent on the species and traits of application. Nevertheless, the relatively small datasets used in previous studies, most with fewer than 5000 observations may have precluded the full potential of DNN. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the impact of the dataset sample size on the performance of DNN compared to Bayesian regression models for genome-enable prediction of body weight in broilers by sub-sampling 63,526 observations of the training set. Results: Predictive performance of DNN improved as sample size increased, reaching a plateau at about 0.32 of prediction correlation when 60% of the entire training set size was used (i.e., 39,510 observations). Interestingly, DNN showed superior prediction correlation using up to 3% of training set, but poorer prediction correlation after that compared to Bayesian Ridge Regression (BRR) and Bayes Cπ. Regardless of the amount of data used to train the predictive machines, DNN displayed the lowest mean square error of prediction compared to all other approaches. The predictive bias was lower for DNN compared to Bayesian models, across all dataset sizes, with estimates close to one with larger sample sizes. Conclusions: DNN had worse prediction correlation compared to BRR and Bayes Cπ, but improved mean square error of prediction and bias relative to both Bayesian models for genome-enabled prediction of body weight in broilers. Such findings, highlights advantages and disadvantages between predictive approaches depending on the criterion used for comparison. Furthermore, the inclusion of more data per se is not a guarantee for the DNN to outperform the Bayesian regression methods commonly used for genome-enabled prediction. Nonetheless, further analysis is necessary to detect scenarios where DNN can clearly outperform Bayesian benchmark models.

References Powered by Scopus

Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks

26010Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

PLINK: A tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses

24323Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks

23100Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Machine learning methods for genomic prediction of cow behavioral traits measured by automatic milking systems in North American Holstein cattle

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A primer on the use of machine learning to distil knowledge from data in biological psychiatry

6Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Sentinel-1 Backscatter and Interferometric Coherence for Soil Moisture Retrieval in Winter Wheat Fields Within a Semiarid South-Mediterranean Climate: Machine Learning Versus Semiempirical Models

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Passafaro, T. L., Lopes, F. B., Dórea, J. R. R., Craven, M., Breen, V., Hawken, R. J., & Rosa, G. J. M. (2020). Would large dataset sample size unveil the potential of deep neural networks for improved genome-enabled prediction of complex traits? The case for body weight in broilers. BMC Genomics, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-020-07181-x

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 5

42%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

33%

Researcher 3

25%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7

64%

Engineering 2

18%

Neuroscience 1

9%

Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medic... 1

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free