Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27441835›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Genome Wide Single Locus Single Trait, Multi-Locus and Multi-Trait Association Mapping for Some Important Agronomic Traits in Common Wheat (T. aestivum L.).

Vandana Jaiswal, Vijay Gahlaut, Prabina Kumar Meher, Reyazul Rouf Mir, Jai Prakash Jaiswal, Atmakuri Ramakrishna Rao, Harindra Singh Balyan, Pushpendra Kumar Gupta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. GWAS for main effects and epistatic interactions for grain morphology traits in wheat.Physiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2022
    Article
  10. GWAS Case Studies in Wheat.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  11. Genetics of spot blotch resistance in bread wheat (Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

8 authors.

Vandana JaiswalDepartment of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut, India.
Vijay GahlautDepartment of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut, India.
Prabina Kumar MeherCentre for Agricultural Bioinformatics, Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
Reyazul Rouf MirDepartment of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut, India.
Jai Prakash JaiswalDept of Genetics & Plant Breeding, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, India.
Atmakuri Ramakrishna RaoCentre for Agricultural Bioinformatics, Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
Harindra Singh BalyanDepartment of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut, India.
Pushpendra Kumar GuptaDepartment of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome wide association study (GWAS) was conducted for 14 agronomic traits in wheat following widely used single locus single trait (SLST) approach, and two recent approaches viz. multi locus mixed model (MLMM), and multi-trait mixed model (MTMM). Association panel consisted of 230 diverse Indian bread wheat cultivars (released during 1910-2006 for commercial cultivation in different agro-climatic regions in India). Three years phenotypic data for 14 traits and genotyping data for 250 SSR markers (distributed across all the 21 wheat chromosomes) was utilized for GWAS. Using SLST, as many as 213 MTAs (p ≤ 0.05, 129 SSRs) were identified for 14 traits, however, only 10 MTAs (~9%; 10 out of 123 MTAs) qualified FDR criteria; these MTAs did not show any linkage drag. Interestingly, these genomic regions were coincident with the genomic regions that were already known to harbor QTLs for same or related agronomic traits. Using MLMM and MTMM, many more QTLs and markers were identified; 22 MTAs (19 QTLs, 21 markers) using MLMM, and 58 MTAs (29 QTLs, 40 markers) using MTMM were identified. In addition, 63 epistatic QTLs were also identified for 13 of the 14 traits, flag leaf length (FLL) being the only exception. Clearly, the power of association mapping improved due to MLMM and MTMM analyses. The epistatic interactions detected during the present study also provided better insight into genetic architecture of the 14 traits that were examined during the present study. Following eight wheat genotypes carried desirable alleles of QTLs for one or more traits, WH542, NI345, NI170, Sharbati Sonora, A90, HW1085, HYB11, and DWR39 (Pragati). These genotypes and the markers associated with important QTLs for major traits can be used in wheat improvement programs either using marker-assisted recurrent selection (MARS) or pseudo-backcrossing method.

Indexed as

AgricultureGenetic LociGenome, PlantGenome-Wide Association StudyQuantitative Trait, HeritableAllelesChromosome MappingChromosomes, PlantEnvironmentEpistasis, GeneticGenetic LinkageGenetic MarkersGenotypeMicrosatellite RepeatsModels, GeneticPhenotypeGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID27441835
PMCPMC4956103

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.