Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407114›Full record

ReviewBMC genomics2021

A review of deep learning applications for genomic selection.

Osval Antonio Montesinos-López, Abelardo Montesinos-López, Paulino Pérez-Rodríguez, José Alberto Barrón-López, Johannes W R Martini, Silvia Berenice Fajardo-Flores, Laura S Gaytan-Lugo, Pedro C Santana-Mancilla, José Crossa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 177 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
177citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

177 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Genome-Enabled Prediction Methods Based on Machine Learning.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Multi-variant GWAS and genomic prediction dissect the genetic architecture underlying tomato fruit weight.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Harnessing artificial intelligence in plant breeding: innovations in digital phenotyping and breeding methodologies.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

117 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Osval Antonio Montesinos-LópezFacultad de Telemática, Universidad de Colima, 28040, Colima, Colima, Mexico.
Abelardo Montesinos-LópezDepartamento de Matemáticas, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Exactas e Ingenierías (CUCEI), Universidad de Guadalajara, 44430, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. aml_uach2004@hotmail.com.
Paulino Pérez-RodríguezColegio de Postgraduados, CP 56230, Montecillos, Edo. de México, Mexico.
José Alberto Barrón-LópezDepartment of Animal Production (DPA), Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina, Av. La Molina s/n La Molina, 15024, Lima, Peru.
Johannes W R MartiniBiometrics and Statistics Unit, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Km 45, CP 52640, Carretera Mexico-Veracruz, Mexico.
Silvia Berenice Fajardo-FloresFacultad de Telemática, Universidad de Colima, 28040, Colima, Colima, Mexico.
Laura S Gaytan-LugoSchool of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Universidad de Colima, 28040, Colima, Colima, Mexico.
Pedro C Santana-MancillaFacultad de Telemática, Universidad de Colima, 28040, Colima, Colima, Mexico.
José CrossaColegio de Postgraduados, CP 56230, Montecillos, Edo. de México, Mexico. j.crossa@cgiar.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9429-5855

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral conventional genomic Bayesian (or no Bayesian) prediction methods have been proposed including the standard additive genetic effect model for which the variance components are estimated with mixed model equations. In recent years, deep learning (DL) methods have been considered in the context of genomic prediction. The DL methods are nonparametric models providing flexibility to adapt to complicated associations between data and output with the ability to adapt to very complex patterns. MAIN BODY: We review the applications of deep learning (DL) methods in genomic selection (GS) to obtain a meta-picture of GS performance and highlight how these tools can help solve challenging plant breeding problems. We also provide general guidance for the effective use of DL methods including the fundamentals of DL and the requirements for its appropriate use. We discuss the pros and cons of this technique compared to traditional genomic prediction approaches as well as the current trends in DL applications.

conclusionsThe main requirement for using DL is the quality and sufficiently large training data. Although, based on current literature GS in plant and animal breeding we did not find clear superiority of DL in terms of prediction power compared to conventional genome based prediction models. Nevertheless, there are clear evidences that DL algorithms capture nonlinear patterns more efficiently than conventional genome based. Deep learning algorithms are able to integrate data from different sources as is usually needed in GS assisted breeding and it shows the ability for improving prediction accuracy for large plant breeding data. It is important to apply DL to large training-testing data sets.

Indexed as

Deep LearningModels, GeneticAnimalsBayes TheoremGenomeGenomicsPhenotypeSelection, GeneticDeep learningGenomic selectionGenomic trendsPlant breeding

Identifiers

PMID33407114
PMCPMC7789712

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.