Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33995461›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2021

Genomic Selection in Tropical Forage Grasses: Current Status and Future Applications.

Rosangela M Simeão, Marcos D V Resende, Rodrigo S Alves, Marco Pessoa-Filho, Ana Luisa S Azevedo, Chris S Jones, Jorge F Pereira, Juarez C Machado

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Forage Crop Research in the Modern Age.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Advances in genomic characterization of Urochloa humidicola: exploring polyploid inheritance and apomixis.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Spotting the Targets of the Apospory ControllerPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. An Overview of the Genetics and Genomics of theFrontiers in plant science · 2021
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rosangela M SimeãoEmbrapa Gado de Corte, Campo Grande, Brazil.
Marcos D V ResendeEmbrapa Café, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, Brazil.
Rodrigo S AlvesInstituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia do Café, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, Brazil.
Marco Pessoa-FilhoEmbrapa Cerrados, Brasília, Brazil.
Ana Luisa S AzevedoEmbrapa Gado de Leite, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Chris S JonesInternational Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jorge F PereiraEmbrapa Gado de Leite, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Juarez C MachadoEmbrapa Gado de Leite, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation · BRUniversidade Federal de Viçosa · BRInternational Livestock Research Institute · KE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The world population is expected to be larger and wealthier over the next few decades and will require more animal products, such as milk and beef. Tropical regions have great potential to meet this growing global demand, where pasturelands play a major role in supporting increased animal production. Better forage is required in consonance with improved sustainability as the planted area should not increase and larger areas cultivated with one or a few forage species should be avoided. Although, conventional tropical forage breeding has successfully released well-adapted and high-yielding cultivars over the last few decades, genetic gains from these programs have been low in view of the growing food demand worldwide. To guarantee their future impact on livestock production, breeding programs should leverage genotyping, phenotyping, and envirotyping strategies to increase genetic gains. Genomic selection (GS) and genome-wide association studies play a primary role in this process, with the advantage of increasing genetic gain due to greater selection accuracy, reduced cycle time, and increased number of individuals that can be evaluated. This strategy provides solutions to bottlenecks faced by conventional breeding methods, including long breeding cycles and difficulties to evaluate complex traits. Initial results from implementing GS in tropical forage grasses (TFGs) are promising with notable improvements over phenotypic selection alone. However, the practical impact of GS in TFG breeding programs remains unclear. The development of appropriately sized training populations is essential for the evaluation and validation of selection markers based on estimated breeding values. Large panels of single-nucleotide polymorphism markers in different tropical forage species are required for multiple application targets at a reduced cost. In this context, this review highlights the current challenges, achievements, availability, and development of genomic resources and statistical methods for the implementation of GS in TFGs. Additionally, the prediction accuracies from recent experiments and the potential to harness diversity from genebanks are discussed. Although, GS in TFGs is still incipient, the advances in genomic tools and statistical models will speed up its implementation in the foreseeable future. All TFG breeding programs should be prepared for these changes.

Indexed as

apomixisbrachiariaelephant grassforage breedingGuinea grassmarker-assisted selectionpolyploidy

Identifiers

PMID33995461
PMCPMC8120112
OpenAlexW3158018515

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.