Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26122758›Full record

ArticleGenetics2015

Assessment of Genetic Heterogeneity in Structured Plant Populations Using Multivariate Whole-Genome Regression Models.

Christina Lehermeier, Chris-Carolin Schön, Gustavo de Los Campos

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Genomic prediction and training set optimization in a structured Mediterranean oat population.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Christina LehermeierPlant Breeding, Technische Universität München, 85354 Freising, Germany christina.lehermeier@tum.de.
Chris-Carolin SchönPlant Breeding, Technische Universität München, 85354 Freising, Germany.
Gustavo de Los CamposDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Statistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824.
Technical University of Munich · DEMichigan State University · US

Funding

Statistical Tools for Whole-Genome Prediction of Complex Traits and DiseasesR01GM101219 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI DE LOS CAMPOS, GUSTAVO · 2012 to 2017
$1.6M
Factors Affecting Prediction Accuracy of Complex Human Traits and DiseasesR01GM099992 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI DE LOS CAMPOS, GUSTAVO · 2012 to 2015
$1.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM099992NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM099992NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM101219NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM101219
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant breeding populations exhibit varying levels of structure and admixture; these features are likely to induce heterogeneity of marker effects across subpopulations. Traditionally, structure has been dealt with as a potential confounder, and various methods exist to "correct" for population stratification. However, these methods induce a mean correction that does not account for heterogeneity of marker effects. The animal breeding literature offers a few recent studies that consider modeling genetic heterogeneity in multibreed data, using multivariate models. However, these methods have received little attention in plant breeding where population structure can have different forms. In this article we address the problem of analyzing data from heterogeneous plant breeding populations, using three approaches: (a) a model that ignores population structure [A-genome-based best linear unbiased prediction (A-GBLUP)], (b) a stratified (i.e., within-group) analysis (W-GBLUP), and (c) a multivariate approach that uses multigroup data and accounts for heterogeneity (MG-GBLUP). The performance of the three models was assessed on three different data sets: a diversity panel of rice (Oryza sativa), a maize (Zea mays L.) half-sib panel, and a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) data set that originated from plant breeding programs. The estimated genomic correlations between subpopulations varied from null to moderate, depending on the genetic distance between subpopulations and traits. Our assessment of prediction accuracy features cases where ignoring population structure leads to a parsimonious more powerful model as well as others where the multivariate and stratified approaches have higher predictive power. In general, the multivariate approach appeared slightly more robust than either the A- or the W-GBLUP.

Indexed as

Genetic HeterogeneityGenome, PlantModels, GeneticMultivariate AnalysisOryzaPlant BreedingQuantitative Trait LociRegression AnalysisTriticumZea maysGBLUPgenomic selectionGenPredmultivariate modelsplant breedingpopulation structureshared data resource

Identifiers

PMID26122758
PMCPMC4566272
OpenAlexW2172569876

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.