Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26497141›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2015

Genome-Enabled Estimates of Additive and Nonadditive Genetic Variances and Prediction of Apple Phenotypes Across Environments.

Satish Kumar, Claire Molloy, Patricio Muñoz, Hans Daetwyler, David Chagné, Richard Volz

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 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 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. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Inheritance of Rootstock Effects in Avocado (Frontiers in plant science · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  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.

Satish KumarThe New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Hawke's Bay Research Center, Havelock North, 4130 New Zealand Satish.Kumar@plantandfood.co.nz.
Claire MolloyThe New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Hawke's Bay Research Center, Havelock North, 4130 New Zealand.
Patricio MuñozAgronomy Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611.
Hans DaetwylerAgriBio Center, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3083, Australia.
David ChagnéPlant & Food Research, Palmerston North Research Center, Palmerston North, 4442, New Zealand.
Richard VolzThe New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Hawke's Bay Research Center, Havelock North, 4130 New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nonadditive genetic effects may have an important contribution to total genetic variation of phenotypes, so estimates of both the additive and nonadditive effects are desirable for breeding and selection purposes. Our main objectives were to: estimate additive, dominance and epistatic variances of apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) phenotypes using relationship matrices constructed from genome-wide dense single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers; and compare the accuracy of genomic predictions using genomic best linear unbiased prediction models with or without including nonadditive genetic effects. A set of 247 clonally replicated individuals was assessed for six fruit quality traits at two sites, and also genotyped using an Illumina 8K SNP array. Across several fruit quality traits, the additive, dominance, and epistatic effects contributed about 30%, 16%, and 19%, respectively, to the total phenotypic variance. Models ignoring nonadditive components yielded upwardly biased estimates of additive variance (heritability) for all traits in this study. The accuracy of genomic predicted genetic values (GEGV) varied from about 0.15 to 0.35 for various traits, and these were almost identical for models with or without including nonadditive effects. However, models including nonadditive genetic effects further reduced the bias of GEGV. Between-site genotypic correlations were high (>0.85) for all traits, and genotype-site interaction accounted for <10% of the phenotypic variability. The accuracy of prediction, when the validation set was present only at one site, was generally similar for both sites, and varied from about 0.50 to 0.85. The prediction accuracies were strongly influenced by trait heritability, and genetic relatedness between the training and validation families.

Indexed as

EnvironmentGene-Environment InteractionGenetic VariationGenome, PlantInheritance PatternsPhenotypeAlgorithmsBreedingEvolution, MolecularGenetics, PopulationGenomicsMalusModels, GeneticPedigreePolymorphism, Single NucleotideReproducibility of Resultsapple breedingGBLUPgenomic predictionheritabilityMalus × domestica

Identifiers

PMID26497141
PMCPMC4683643

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.