Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33135095›Full record

ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2021

Genomic prediction of agronomic traits in wheat using different models and cross-validation designs.

Teketel A Haile, Sean Walkowiak, Amidou N'Diaye, John M Clarke, Pierre J Hucl, Richard D Cuthbert, Ron E Knox, Curtis J Pozniak

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Mining QTLs and candidate genes in bread wheat associated with kernel hardness through GWAS.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  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.

Teketel A HaileDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Sean WalkowiakCanadian Grain Commission, Grain Research Laboratory, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Amidou N'DiayeDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
John M ClarkeDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Pierre J HuclDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
Richard D CuthbertSemiarid Prairie Agricultural Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Swift Current, SK, Canada.
Ron E KnoxSemiarid Prairie Agricultural Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Swift Current, SK, Canada.
Curtis J PozniakDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada. curtis.pozniak@usask.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7536-3856

Funding

Genome Canada 8310
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key messageGenomic predictions across environments and within populations resulted in moderate to high accuracies but across-population genomic prediction should not be considered in wheat for small population size. Genomic selection (GS) is a marker-based selection suggested to improve the genetic gain of quantitative traits in plant breeding programs. We evaluated the effects of training population (TP) composition, cross-validation design, and genetic relationship between the training and breeding populations on the accuracy of GS in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Two populations of 231 and 304 spring hexaploid wheat lines that were phenotyped for six agronomic traits and genotyped with the wheat 90 K array were used to assess the accuracy of seven GS models (RR-BLUP, G-BLUP, BayesB, BL, RKHS, GS + de novo GWAS, and reaction norm) using different cross-validation designs. BayesB outperformed the other models for within-population genomic predictions in the presence of few quantitative trait loci (QTL) with large effects. However, including fixed-effect marker covariates gave better performance for an across-population prediction when the same QTL underlie traits in both populations. The accuracy of prediction was highly variable based on the cross-validation design, which suggests the importance to use a design that resembles the variation within a breeding program. Moderate to high accuracies were obtained when predictions were made within populations. In contrast, across-population genomic prediction accuracies were very low, suggesting that the evaluated models are not suitable for prediction across independent populations. On the other hand, across-environment prediction and forward prediction designs using the reaction norm model resulted in moderate to high accuracies, suggesting that GS can be applied in wheat to predict the performance of newly developed lines and lines in incomplete field trials.

Indexed as

GenomicsModels, GeneticQuantitative Trait LociGenetic Association StudiesGenetics, PopulationGenotypePhenotypePlant BreedingPolyploidyTriticum

Identifiers

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.