Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34544139›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021

Genomic prediction in family bulks using different traits and cross-validations in pine.

Esteban F Rios, Mario H M L Andrade, Marcio F R Resende, Matias Kirst, Marcos D V de Resende, Janeo E de Almeida Filho, Salvador A Gezan, Patricio Munoz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Esteban F RiosAgronomy Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3389-7195
Mario H M L AndradeAgronomy Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Marcio F R ResendeHorticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Matias KirstSchool of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Marcos D V de ResendeEMBRAPA Café/Department of Statistics, Federal University of Viçosa, Avenida PH Rolfs S/N, Viçosa 36570-000, Brazil.
Janeo E de Almeida FilhoBayer Crop Science, Estrada da Invernadinha, 2000, Coxilha-RS 99145-000, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3906-8884
Salvador A GezanVSN International Ltd, Hemel Hempstead HP2 4TP, UK.
Patricio MunozHorticultural Sciences Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8973-9351

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic prediction integrates statistical, genomic, and computational tools to improve the estimation of breeding values and increase genetic gain. Due to the broad diversity in mating systems, breeding schemes, propagation methods, and unit of selection, no universal genomic prediction approach can be applied in all crops. In a genome-wide family prediction (GWFP) approach, the family is the basic unit of selection. We tested GWFP in two loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) datasets: a breeding population composed of 63 full-sib families (5-20 individuals per family), and a simulated population with the same pedigree structure. In both populations, phenotypic and genomic data was pooled at the family level in silico. Marker effects were estimated to compute genomic estimated breeding values (GEBV) at the individual and family (GWFP) levels. Less than six individuals per family produced inaccurate estimates of family phenotypic performance and allele frequency. Tested across different scenarios, GWFP predictive ability was higher than those for GEBV in both populations. Validation sets composed of families with similar phenotypic mean and variance as the training population yielded predictions consistently higher and more accurate than other validation sets. Results revealed potential for applying GWFP in breeding programs whose selection unit are family, and for systems where family can serve as training sets. The GWFP approach is well suited for crops that are routinely genotyped and phenotyped at the plot-level, but it can be extended to other breeding programs. Higher predictive ability obtained with GWFP would motivate the application of genomic prediction in these situations.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticSelection, GeneticGenomicsGenotypeHumansPhenotypePlant BreedingPolymorphism, Single Nucleotidefamily selectiongenomic predictionpredictive abilitytraining population

Identifiers

PMID34544139
PMCPMC8496210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.