ArticleGenetics2005
Positive assortative mating with family size as a function of predicted parental breeding values.
Article in Genetics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimization of selection contribution and mate allocations in monoecious tree breeding populations.BMC genetics · 2009Article
- Optimum contribution selection in large general tree breeding populations with an application to Scots pine.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While other investigations have described benefits of positive assortative mating (PAM) for forest tree breeding, the allocation of resources among mates in these studies was either equal or varied, using schemes corresponding only to parental rank (i.e., more resources invested in higher-ranking parents). In this simulation study, family sizes were proportional to predicted midparent BLUP values. The distribution of midparent BLUP values was standardized by a constant, which was varied to study the range of distributions of family size. Redistributing progenies from lower- to higher-ranking families to a point where an equal number of progenies were still selected out of each family to the next generation caused minimal change in group coancestry and inbreeding in the breeding population (BP), while the additive genetic response and variance in the BP were both greatly enhanced. This generated additional genetic gains for forest plantations by selecting more superior genotypes from the BP (compared to PAM with equal family sizes) for production of improved regeneration materials. These conclusions were verified for a range of heritability under a polygenic model and under a mixed-inheritance model with a QTL contributing to the trait variation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.