ArticleBMC genetics2014
Genome-enabled predictions for binomial traits in sugar beet populations.
Article in BMC genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- High accuracy of genome-enabled prediction of belowground and physiological traits in barley seedlings.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Article
- Genome-enabled predictions for fruit weight and quality from repeated records in European peach progenies.BMC genomics · 2017Article
- An experimental validation of genomic selection in octoploid strawberry.Horticulture research · 2017Article
- Genomic prediction of unordered categorical traits: an application to subpopulation assignment in German Warmblood horses.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2016Article
- "Noisy beets": impact of phenotyping errors on genomic predictions for binary traits in Beta vulgaris.Plant methods · 2016Article
- Genetic Diversity and Physiological Performance of Portuguese Wild Beet (Beta vulgaris spp. maritima) from Three Contrasting Habitats.Frontiers in plant science · 2016Article
- A new polymorphism on chromosome 6 associated with bolting tendency in sugar beet.BMC genetics · 2015Article
- Estimating Trait Heritability in Highly Fecund Species.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2015Article
- Accuracy and responses of genomic selection on key traits in apple breeding.Horticulture research · 2015Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGenomic information can be used to predict not only continuous but also categorical (e.g. binomial) traits. Several traits of interest in human medicine and agriculture present a discrete distribution of phenotypes (e.g. disease status). Root vigor in sugar beet (B. vulgaris) is an example of binomial trait of agronomic importance. In this paper, a panel of 192 SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) was used to genotype 124 sugar beet individual plants from 18 lines, and to classify them as showing "high" or "low" root vigor.
resultsA threshold model was used to fit the relationship between binomial root vigor and SNP genotypes, through the matrix of genomic relationships between individuals in a genomic BLUP (G-BLUP) approach. From a 5-fold cross-validation scheme, 500 testing subsets were generated. The estimated average cross-validation error rate was 0.000731 (0.073%). Only 9 out of 12326 test observations (500 replicates for an average test set size of 24.65) were misclassified.
conclusionsThe estimated prediction accuracy was quite high. Such accurate predictions may be related to the high estimated heritability for root vigor (0.783) and to the few genes with large effect underlying the trait. Despite the sparse SNP panel, there was sufficient within-scaffold LD where SNPs with large effect on root vigor were located to allow for genome-enabled predictions to work.
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.