Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25943522›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2015

Using the Animal Model to Accelerate Response to Selection in a Self-Pollinating Crop.

Wallace A Cowling, Katia T Stefanova, Cameron P Beeck, Matthew N Nelson, Bonnie L W Hargreaves, Olaf Sass, Arthur R Gilmour, Kadambot H M Siddique

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Wallace A CowlingThe UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia wallace.cowling@uwa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3101-7695
Katia T StefanovaThe UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Cameron P BeeckThe UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Matthew N NelsonThe UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia School of Plant Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Bonnie L W HargreavesThe UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia School of Plant Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Olaf SassNorddeutsche Pflanzenzucht Hans-Georg Lembke KG, Hohenlieth, 24363 Holtsee, Germany.
Arthur R GilmourCargo Vale, Cargo, New South Wales 2800, Australia.
Kadambot H M SiddiqueThe UWA Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.

Funding

AHRQ HHS U18 HS010548
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used the animal model in S0 (F1) recurrent selection in a self-pollinating crop including, for the first time, phenotypic and relationship records from self progeny, in addition to cross progeny, in the pedigree. We tested the model in Pisum sativum, the autogamous annual species used by Mendel to demonstrate the particulate nature of inheritance. Resistance to ascochyta blight (Didymella pinodes complex) in segregating S0 cross progeny was assessed by best linear unbiased prediction over two cycles of selection. Genotypic concurrence across cycles was provided by pure-line ancestors. From cycle 1, 102/959 S0 plants were selected, and their S1 self progeny were intercrossed and selfed to produce 430 S0 and 575 S2 individuals that were evaluated in cycle 2. The analysis was improved by including all genetic relationships (with crossing and selfing in the pedigree), additive and nonadditive genetic covariances between cycles, fixed effects (cycles and spatial linear trends), and other random effects. Narrow-sense heritability for ascochyta blight resistance was 0.305 and 0.352 in cycles 1 and 2, respectively, calculated from variance components in the full model. The fitted correlation of predicted breeding values across cycles was 0.82. Average accuracy of predicted breeding values was 0.851 for S2 progeny of S1 parent plants and 0.805 for S0 progeny tested in cycle 2, and 0.878 for S1 parent plants for which no records were available. The forecasted response to selection was 11.2% in the next cycle with 20% S0 selection proportion. This is the first application of the animal model to cyclic selection in heterozygous populations of selfing plants. The method can be used in genomic selection, and for traits measured on S0-derived bulks such as grain yield.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticBreedingDisease ResistanceGenotypePedigreePhenotypePisum sativumPlant DiseasesPollinationSaccharomycetalesSelection, Geneticanimal modelautogamous plantsblack spot diseaseBLUP selectionfield peasgenomic selectionGenPredpedigree selectionshared data resource

Identifiers

PMID25943522
PMCPMC4502376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.