Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26744627›Full record

ArticleHorticulture research2015

Accuracy and responses of genomic selection on key traits in apple breeding.

Hélène Muranty, Michela Troggio, Inès Ben Sadok, Mehdi Al Rifaï, Annemarie Auwerkerken, Elisa Banchi, Riccardo Velasco, Piergiorgio Stevanato, W Eric van de Weg, Mario Di Guardo and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Horticulture research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing 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

78 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Genomic selection for crop improvement in fruits and vegetables: a systematic scoping review.Molecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

13 authors.

Hélène MurantyInstitut de Recherche en Horticulture et Semences UMR1345, INRA, SFR 4207 QUASAV , F-49071 Beaucouze, France.
Michela TroggioResearch and Innovation Center, Fondazione Edmund Mach, San Michele all'Adige , Trento, Italy.
Inès Ben SadokInstitut de Recherche en Horticulture et Semences UMR1345, INRA, SFR 4207 QUASAV , F-49071 Beaucouze, France.
Mehdi Al RifaïInstitut de Recherche en Horticulture et Semences UMR1345, INRA, SFR 4207 QUASAV , F-49071 Beaucouze, France.
Annemarie AuwerkerkenBetter3Fruit , Rillaar, Belgium.
Elisa BanchiResearch and Innovation Center, Fondazione Edmund Mach, San Michele all'Adige , Trento, Italy.
Riccardo VelascoResearch and Innovation Center, Fondazione Edmund Mach, San Michele all'Adige , Trento, Italy.
Piergiorgio StevanatoDAFNAE, Dipartimento di Agronomia Animali Alimenti Risorse Naturali e Ambiente , viale Università 16, 35020 Legnaro (PD), Università, degli Studi di Padova , Italy.
W Eric van de WegWageningen UR Plant Breeding, Wageningen University and Research Center , Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Mario Di GuardoResearch and Innovation Center, Fondazione Edmund Mach, San Michele all'Adige, Trento, Italy; Wageningen UR Plant Breeding, Wageningen University and Research Center, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Satish KumarThe New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited , Private Bag 1401, Havelock North 4157, New Zealand.
François LaurensInstitut de Recherche en Horticulture et Semences UMR1345, INRA, SFR 4207 QUASAV , F-49071 Beaucouze, France.
Marco C A M BinkBiometris, Wageningen University and Research Center , Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of genomic selection in fruit tree crops is expected to enhance breeding efficiency by increasing prediction accuracy, increasing selection intensity and decreasing generation interval. The objectives of this study were to assess the accuracy of prediction and selection response in commercial apple breeding programmes for key traits. The training population comprised 977 individuals derived from 20 pedigreed full-sib families. Historic phenotypic data were available on 10 traits related to productivity and fruit external appearance and genotypic data for 7829 SNPs obtained with an Illumina 20K SNP array. From these data, a genome-wide prediction model was built and subsequently used to calculate genomic breeding values of five application full-sib families. The application families had genotypes at 364 SNPs from a dedicated 512 SNP array, and these genotypic data were extended to the high-density level by imputation. These five families were phenotyped for 1 year and their phenotypes were compared to the predicted breeding values. Accuracy of genomic prediction across the 10 traits reached a maximum value of 0.5 and had a median value of 0.19. The accuracies were strongly affected by the phenotypic distribution and heritability of traits. In the largest family, significant selection response was observed for traits with high heritability and symmetric phenotypic distribution. Traits that showed non-significant response often had reduced and skewed phenotypic variation or low heritability. Among the five application families the accuracies were uncorrelated to the degree of relatedness to the training population. The results underline the potential of genomic prediction to accelerate breeding progress in outbred fruit tree crops that still need to overcome long generation intervals and extensive phenotyping costs.

Identifiers

PMID26744627
PMCPMC4688998

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.