Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31775638›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2019

The impact of sample selection strategies on genetic diversity and representativeness in germplasm bank collections.

Jorge Franco-Duran, José Crossa, Jiafa Chen, Sarah Jane Hearne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Sperm Repository for a Breeding Program of the Eastern OysterAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
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.

Jorge Franco-DuranFacultad de Agronomía, Universidad de la República and CIMMYT, Ruta 3, Km 363, 60000, Paysandú, Uruguay.
José CrossaCIMMYT, KM 45 Carretera Mexico-Veracruz, El Batan, 56237, Texcoco, Edo. De Mexico, Mexico.
Jiafa ChenCIMMYT, KM 45 Carretera Mexico-Veracruz, El Batan, 56237, Texcoco, Edo. De Mexico, Mexico.
Sarah Jane HearneCIMMYT, KM 45 Carretera Mexico-Veracruz, El Batan, 56237, Texcoco, Edo. De Mexico, Mexico. s.hearne@cgiar.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2015-2450

Funding

Secretaria de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGermplasm banks maintain collections representing the most comprehensive catalogue of native genetic diversity available for crop improvement. Users of germplasm banks are interested in a fixed number of samples representing as broadly as possible the diversity present in the wider collection. A relevant question is whether it is necessary to develop completely independent germplasm samples or it is possible to select nested sets from a pre-defined core set panel not from the whole collection. We used data from 15,384, maize landraces stored in the CIMMYT germplasm bank to study the impact on 8 diversity criteria and the sample representativeness of: (1) two core selection strategies, a statistical sampling (DM), or a numerical maximization method (CH); (2) selecting samples of varying sizes; and (3) selecting samples of different sizes independently of each other or in a nested manner.

resultsSample sizes greater than 10% of the whole population size retained more than 75% of the polymorphic markers for all selection strategies and types of sample; lower sample sizes showed more variability (instability) among repetitions; the strongest effect of sample size was observed on the CH-independent combination. Independent and nested samples showed similar performance for all the criteria for the DM method, but there were differences between them for the CH method. The DM method achieved better approximations to the known values in the population than the CH method; 2-d multidimensional scaling plots of the collection and samples highlighted tendency of sample selection towards the extremes of diversity in the CH method, compared with sampling more representative of the overall genotypic distribution of diversity under the DM method.

conclusionsThe use of core subsets of size greater than or equal to 10% of the whole collection satisfied well the requirement of representativeness and diversity. Nested samples showed similar diversity and representativeness characteristics as independent samples offering a cost effective method of sample definition for germplasm banks. For most criteria assessed the DM method achieved better approximations to the known values in the whole population than the CH method, that is, it generated more statistically representative samples from collections.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationSeed BankModels, StatisticalSampling StudiesZea maysGenetic diversity representativenessIndependent and nested samplesSample sizeSampling Genebanks accessionsSNPs

Identifiers

PMID31775638
PMCPMC6882233

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.