ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023
The impact of epistasis in the heterosis and combining ability analyses.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic Evaluation and Selection ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Hybrid performance in finger millet (Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Combining Ability ofCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2024Article
- Epistasis and pleiotropy-induced variation for plant breeding.Plant biotechnology journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current theoretical knowledge concerning the influence of epistasis on heterosis is based on a simplified multiplicative model. The objective of this study was to assess how epistasis affects the heterosis and combining ability analyses, assuming additive model, hundreds of genes, linkage disequilibrium (LD), dominance, and seven types of digenic epistasis. We developed the quantitative genetics theory for supporting the simulation of the individual genotypic values in nine populations, the selfed populations, the 36 interpopulation crosses, 180 doubled haploids (DHs), and their 16,110 crosses, assuming 400 genes on 10 chromosomes of 200 cM. Epistasis only affects population heterosis if there is LD. Only additive × additive and dominance × dominance epistasis can affect the components of the heterosis and combining ability analyses of populations. Epistasis can have a negative impact on the heterosis and combining ability analysis of populations, leading to wrong inferences regarding the identification of superior and most divergent populations. However, this depends on the type of epistasis, percentage of epistatic genes, and magnitude of their effects. Except for duplicate genes with cumulative effects and non-epistatic genic interaction, there was a decrease in the average heterosis by increasing the percentage of epistatic genes and the magnitude of their effects. The same results are generally true for the combining ability analysis of DHs. The combining ability analyses of subsets of 20 DHs showed no significant average impact of epistasis on the identification of the most divergent ones, regardless of the number of epistatic genes and magnitude of their effects. However, a negative effect on the assessment of the superior DHs can occur assuming 100% of epistatic genes, but depending on the epistasis type and the epistatic effect magnitude.
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.