Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31751371›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Comparison of shape quantification methods for genomic prediction, and genome-wide association study of sorghum seed morphology.

Lisa Sakamoto, Hiromi Kajiya-Kanegae, Koji Noshita, Hideki Takanashi, Masaaki Kobayashi, Toru Kudo, Kentaro Yano, Tsuyoshi Tokunaga, Nobuhiro Tsutsumi, Hiroyoshi Iwata

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

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

10 authors.

Lisa SakamotoGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0364-5122
Hiromi Kajiya-KanegaeResearch Center for Agricultural Information Technology, NARO, Ibaraki, Japan.
Koji NoshitaDepartment of Biology, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9510-5897
Hideki TakanashiGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Masaaki KobayashiFaculty of Agriculture, Meiji University, Kanagawa, Japan.
Toru KudoFaculty of Agriculture, Meiji University, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kentaro YanoFaculty of Agriculture, Meiji University, Kanagawa, Japan.
Tsuyoshi TokunagaEARTHNOTE Co., Ltd., Okinawa, Japan.
Nobuhiro TsutsumiGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroyoshi IwataGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Seed shape is an important agronomic trait with continuous variation among genotypes. Therefore, the quantitative evaluation of this variation is highly important. Among geometric morphometrics methods, elliptic Fourier analysis and semi-landmark analysis are often used for the quantification of biological shape variations. Elliptic Fourier analysis is an approximation method to treat contours as a waveform. Semi-landmark analysis is a method of superimposed points in which the differences of multiple contour positions are minimized. However, no detailed comparison of these methods has been undertaken. Moreover, these shape descriptors vary when the scale and direction of the contour and the starting point of the contour trace change. Thus, these methods should be compared with respect to the standardization of the scale and direction of the contour and the starting point of the contour trace. In the present study, we evaluated seed shape variations in a sorghum (Sorghum bicolor Moench) germplasm collection to analyze the association between shape variations and genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphisms by genomic prediction (GP) and genome-wide association studies (GWAS). In our analysis, we used all possible combinations of three shape description methods and eight standardization procedures for the scale and direction of the contour as well as the starting point of the contour trace; these combinations were compared in terms of GP accuracy and the GWAS results. We compared the shape description methods (elliptic Fourier descriptors and the coordinates of superposed pseudo-landmark points) and found that principal component analysis of their quantitative descriptors yielded similar results. Different scaling and direction standardization procedures caused differences in the principal component scores, average shape, and the results of GP and GWAS.

Indexed as

Edible GrainFourier AnalysisGenome-Wide Association StudyGenomicsGenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideSeedsSorghum

Identifiers

PMID31751371
PMCPMC6872133

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.