Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37291402›Full record

ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2023

Clonal diploid and autopolyploid breeding strategies to harness heterosis: insights from stochastic simulation.

Marlee R Labroo, Jeffrey B Endelman, Dorcus C Gemenet, Christian R Werner, Robert Chris Gaynor, Giovanny E Covarrubias-Pazaran

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Heterosis and hybrid breeding.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Marlee R LabrooExcellence in Breeding Platform, Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research, Texcoco, Mexico.
Jeffrey B EndelmanDepartment of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0957-4337
Dorcus C GemenetExcellence in Breeding Platform, Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research, Texcoco, Mexico.
Christian R WernerExcellence in Breeding Platform, Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research, Texcoco, Mexico.
Robert Chris GaynorBayer Crop Science, 700 Chesterfield Pkwy W., Chesterfield, MO, 63017, USA.
Giovanny E Covarrubias-PazaranExcellence in Breeding Platform, Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research, Texcoco, Mexico. g.covarrubias@irri.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7194-3837
Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz Y Trigo · MXBayer (United States) · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1177070
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

key messageReciprocal recurrent selection sometimes increases genetic gain per unit cost in clonal diploids with heterosis due to dominance, but it typically does not benefit autopolyploids. Breeding can change the dominance as well as additive genetic value of populations, thus utilizing heterosis. A common hybrid breeding strategy is reciprocal recurrent selection (RRS), in which parents of hybrids are typically recycled within pools based on general combining ability. However, the relative performances of RRS and other breeding strategies have not been thoroughly compared. RRS can have relatively increased costs and longer cycle lengths, but these are sometimes outweighed by its ability to harness heterosis due to dominance. Here, we used stochastic simulation to compare genetic gain per unit cost of RRS, terminal crossing, recurrent selection on breeding value, and recurrent selection on cross performance considering different amounts of population heterosis due to dominance, relative cycle lengths, time horizons, estimation methods, selection intensities, and ploidy levels. In diploids with phenotypic selection at high intensity, whether RRS was the optimal breeding strategy depended on the initial population heterosis. However, in diploids with rapid-cycling genomic selection at high intensity, RRS was the optimal breeding strategy after 50 years over almost all amounts of initial population heterosis under the study assumptions. Diploid RRS required more population heterosis to outperform other strategies as its relative cycle length increased and as selection intensity and time horizon decreased. The optimal strategy depended on selection intensity, a proxy for inbreeding rate. Use of diploid fully inbred parents vs. outbred parents with RRS typically did not affect genetic gain. In autopolyploids, RRS typically did not outperform one-pool strategies regardless of the initial population heterosis.

Indexed as

DiploidyHybrid VigorComputer SimulationInbreeding

Identifiers

PMID37291402
PMCPMC10250475
OpenAlexW4379878530

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.