ArticleThe plant genome2023
Efficacy of plant breeding using genomic information.
Article in The plant genome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Research progress on genomic selection breeding technology for crops.Protoplasma · 2026Review
- Obscured-ensemble models for genomic prediction.PloS one · 2025Article
- Efficacy of plant breeding using genomic information.The plant genome · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic selection (GS) proposed by Meuwissen et al. more than 20 years ago, is revolutionizing plant and animal breeding. Although GS has been widely accepted and applied to plant and animal breeding, there are many factors affecting its efficacy. We studied 14 real datasets to respond to the practical question of whether the accuracy of genomic prediction increases when considering genomic as compared with not using genomic. We found across traits, environments, datasets, and metrics, that the average gain in prediction accuracy when genomic information is considered was 26.31%, while only in terms of Pearson's correlation the gain was of 46.1%, while only in terms of normalized root mean squared error the gain was of 6.6%. If the quality of the makers and relatedness of the individuals increase, major gains in prediction accuracy can be obtained, but if these two factors decrease, a lower increase is possible. Finally, our findings reinforce genomic is vital for improving the prediction accuracy and, therefore, the realized genetic gain in genomic assisted plant breeding programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.