Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30025026›Full record

ArticleThe plant genome2018

Four Parent Maize (FPM) Population: Effects of Mating Designs on Linkage Disequilibrium and Mapping Quantitative Traits.

Steven L Anderson, Adam L Mahan, Seth C Murray, Patricia E Klein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The plant genome, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Steven L Anderson
Adam L Mahan
Seth C Murray
Patricia E Klein

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiparent advanced generation inter-cross (MAGIC) populations can provide improved genetic mapping resolution by increasing allelic diversity and effective recombination. The Four Parent Maize (FPM; L.) population implemented five different mating designs used in MAGIC and bi-parental populations to compare empirical effects on genetic resolution and power of quantitative trait locus (QTL) detection; the combined population here comprised of 1149 individuals with 118,509 genetic markers. Measurements were recorded for plant height (PH), ear height (EH), days to anthesis (DTA) and silking (DTS) in seven environments, spanning three years. Linkage disequilibrium (LD) analysis of subpopulations indicated MAGIC population designs should incorporate generations of intermating to overcome initial LD increase caused by population admixture in a non-intermated four parent population (4way0sib). A 3- to 4-fold increase in genetic resolution (<0.8) and a 2.5-fold decrease in the extent of LD decay (<0.2) compared to the biparental populations was found for the four parent cross at the third generation of intermating (4way3sib). Power of QTL detection was affected to a greater extent by sample size rather than by mating designs. The FPM power simulations indicated that MAGIC populations have the ability to meet or exceed the mapping power of nested association panels with fewer individuals and diversity inputs. Using association mapping software we identified 2, 5, 7, and 6 QTL for PH, EH, DTA, and DTS, respectively. The FPM population is a valuable resource for quantifying empirical improvements of parent number, intermating, and the number of progeny for QTL linkage mapping.

Indexed as

Linkage DisequilibriumChromosome MappingFlowersGenetic MarkersGenetics, PopulationPhenotypePlant BreedingTexasZea maysGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID30025026
PMCPMC12810144

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.