Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37309481›Full record

ArticleMolecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement2021

Genomic prediction using training population design in interspecific soybean populations.

Eduardo Beche, Jason D Gillman, Qijian Song, Randall Nelson, Tim Beissinger, Jared Decker, Grover Shannon, Andrew M Scaboo

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Soybean genetic resources contributing to sustainable protein production.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2022
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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.

Eduardo BecheDivision of Plant Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO USA.
Jason D GillmanPlant Genetics Res. Unit, USDA-ARS, Columbia, MO USA.
Qijian SongSoybean Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD USA.
Randall NelsonDepartment of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, and USDA-Agricultural Research Service (retired), 1101 W. Peabody Dr., Urbana, IL 61801 USA.
Tim BeissingerDivision of Plant Breeding Methodology, Department of Crop Sciences, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany.
Jared DeckerDivision of Animal Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO USA.
Grover ShannonDivision of Plant Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO USA.
Andrew M ScabooDivision of Plant Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9670-8446
University of Missouri · USAgricultural Research Service · USUniversity of Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Agronomically important traits generally have complex genetic architecture, where many genes have a small and largely additive effect. Genomic prediction has been demonstrated to increase genetic gain and efficiency in plant breeding programs beyond marker-assisted selection and phenotypic selection. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of allelic origin, marker density, training population size, and cross-validation schemes on the accuracy of genomic prediction models in an interspecific soybean nested association mapping (NAM) panel. Three cross-validation schemes were used: (a) Within-Family (WF): training population and predictions are made exclusively within each family; (b) Across All families (AF): all the individuals from the three families were randomly assigned to either the training or validation set; (c) Leave one Family out (LFO): each family is predicted using a training set that contains the other two families. Predictive abilities increased with training population size up to 350 individuals, but no significant gains were noted beyond 250 individuals in the training population. The number of markers had a limited impact on the observed predictive ability across traits; increasing markers used in the model above 1000 revealed no significant increases in prediction accuracy. Predictive abilities for AF were not significantly different from the WF method, and predictive abilities across populations for the WF method had a range of 0.58 to 0.70 for maturity, protein, meal, and oil. Our results also showed encouraging prediction accuracies for grain yield (0.58-0.69) using the WF method. Partitioning genomic prediction between Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11032-021-01203-6.

Indexed as

Genetic diversityGenomic estimated breeding valuesGenomic predictionGlycine sojaGrain yieldSoybean

Identifiers

PMID37309481
PMCPMC10236090
OpenAlexW3128528370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.