Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25956247›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2015

Prediction accuracies for growth and wood attributes of interior spruce in space using genotyping-by-sequencing.

Omnia Gamal El-Dien, Blaise Ratcliffe, Jaroslav Klápště, Charles Chen, Ilga Porth, Yousry A El-Kassaby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing 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

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Omnia Gamal El-DienDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, Faculty of Forestry, The University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada. omnia.gamal@alumni.ubc.ca.
Blaise RatcliffeDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, Faculty of Forestry, The University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada. b.ratcliffe@gmail.com.
Jaroslav KlápštěDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, Faculty of Forestry, The University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada. klapste.j@gmail.com.
Charles ChenDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, 74078-3035, USA. charles.chen@okstate.edu.
Ilga PorthDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, Faculty of Forestry, The University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada. porth@mail.ubc.ca.
Yousry A El-KassabyDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences, Faculty of Forestry, The University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 1Z4, Canada. y.el-kassaby@ubc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenomic selection (GS) in forestry can substantially reduce the length of breeding cycle and increase gain per unit time through early selection and greater selection intensity, particularly for traits of low heritability and late expression. Affordable next-generation sequencing technologies made it possible to genotype large numbers of trees at a reasonable cost.

resultsGenotyping-by-sequencing was used to genotype 1,126 Interior spruce trees representing 25 open-pollinated families planted over three sites in British Columbia, Canada. Four imputation algorithms were compared (mean value (MI), singular value decomposition (SVD), expectation maximization (EM), and a newly derived, family-based k-nearest neighbor (kNN-Fam)). Trees were phenotyped for several yield and wood attributes. Single- and multi-site GS prediction models were developed using the Ridge Regression Best Linear Unbiased Predictor (RR-BLUP) and the Generalized Ridge Regression (GRR) to test different assumption about trait architecture. Finally, using PCA, multi-trait GS prediction models were developed. The EM and kNN-Fam imputation methods were superior for 30 and 60% missing data, respectively. The RR-BLUP GS prediction model produced better accuracies than the GRR indicating that the genetic architecture for these traits is complex. GS prediction accuracies for multi-site were high and better than those of single-sites while multi-site predictability produced the lowest accuracies reflecting type-b genetic correlations and deemed unreliable. The incorporation of genomic information in quantitative genetics analyses produced more realistic heritability estimates as half-sib pedigree tended to inflate the additive genetic variance and subsequently both heritability and gain estimates. Principle component scores as representatives of multi-trait GS prediction models produced surprising results where negatively correlated traits could be concurrently selected for using PCA2 and PCA3.

conclusionsThe application of GS to open-pollinated family testing, the simplest form of tree improvement evaluation methods, was proven to be effective. Prediction accuracies obtained for all traits greatly support the integration of GS in tree breeding. While the within-site GS prediction accuracies were high, the results clearly indicate that single-site GS models ability to predict other sites are unreliable supporting the utilization of multi-site approach. Principle component scores provided an opportunity for the concurrent selection of traits with different phenotypic optima.

Indexed as

Genotyping TechniquesSequence AnalysisWoodAlgorithmsGenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingModels, GeneticPiceaPlant Breeding

Identifiers

PMID25956247
PMCPMC4424896

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.