Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33590303›Full record

ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2021

Accuracy of genomic prediction of complex traits in sugarcane.

Ben J Hayes, Xianming Wei, Priya Joyce, Felicity Atkin, Emily Deomano, Jenny Yue, Loan Nguyen, Elizabeth M Ross, Tony Cavallaro, Karen S Aitken and 1 more

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 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

11 authors.

Ben J HayesQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia. b.hayes@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5606-3970
Xianming WeiSugar Research Australia, Mackay, QLD, 4741, Australia.
Priya JoyceSugar Research Australia, 50 Meiers Road, Indooroopilly, QLD, 4068, Australia.
Felicity AtkinSugar Research Australia, Meringa Gordonvale, QLD, 4865, Australia.
Emily DeomanoSugar Research Australia, 50 Meiers Road, Indooroopilly, QLD, 4068, Australia.
Jenny YueSugar Research Australia, 50 Meiers Road, Indooroopilly, QLD, 4068, Australia.
Loan NguyenQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Elizabeth M RossQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Tony CavallaroQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Karen S AitkenAgriculture and Food, CSIRO, QBP, St. Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia.
Kai P Voss-FelsQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-366X

Funding

Sugar Research Australia 2017/02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key messageComplex traits in sugarcane can be accurately predicted using genome-wide DNA markers. Genomic single-step prediction is an attractive method for genomic selection in commercial breeding programs. Sugarcane breeding programs have achieved up to 1% genetic gain in key traits such as tonnes of cane per hectare (TCH), commercial cane sugar (CCS) and Fibre content over the past decades. Here, we assess the potential of genomic selection to increase the rate of genetic gain for these traits by deriving genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) from a reference population of 3984 clones genotyped for 26 K SNP. We evaluated the three different genomic prediction approaches GBLUP, genomic single step (GenomicSS), and BayesR. GenomicSS combining pedigree and SNP information from historic and recent breeding programs achieved the most accurate predictions for most traits (0.3-0.44). This method is attractive for routine genetic evaluation because it requires relatively little modification to the existing evaluation and results in breeding value estimates for all individuals, not only those genotyped. Adding information from early-stage trials added up to 5% accuracy for CCS and Fibre, but 0% for TCH, reflecting the importance of competition effects for TCH. These GEBV accuracies are sufficiently high that, combined with the right breeding strategy, a doubling of the rate of genetic gain could be achieved. We also assessed the flowering traits days to flowering, gender and pollen viability and found high heritabilities of 0.57, 0.78 and 0.72, respectively. The GEBV accuracies indicated that genomic selection could be used to improve these traits. This could open new avenues for breeders to manage their breeding programs, for example, by synchronising flowering time and selecting males with high pollen viability.

Indexed as

Genome, PlantMultifactorial InheritancePolymorphism, Single NucleotideQuantitative Trait, HeritableChromosome MappingChromosomes, PlantFlowersGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenetics, PopulationPlant BreedingPlant ProteinsSaccharumPlant Proteins

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.