ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023
On the usefulness of mock genomes to define heterotic pools, testers, and hybrid predictions in orphan crops.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fine-tuning GBS data with comparison of reference and mock genome approaches for advancing genomic selection in less studied farmed species.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Combining genotyping approaches improves resolution for association mapping: a case study in tropical maize under water stress conditions.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advances in genomics in recent years have increased the accuracy and efficiency of breeding programs for many crops. Nevertheless, the adoption of genomic enhancement for several other crops essential in developing countries is still limited, especially for those that do not have a reference genome. These crops are more often called orphans. This is the first report to show how the results provided by different platforms, including the use of a simulated genome, called the mock genome, can generate in population structure and genetic diversity studies, especially when the intention is to use this information to support the formation of heterotic groups, choice of testers, and genomic prediction of single crosses. For that, we used a method to assemble a reference genome to perform the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) calling without needing an external genome. Thus, we compared the analysis results using the mock genome with the standard approaches (array and genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS)). The results showed that the GBS-Mock presented similar results to the standard methods of genetic diversity studies, division of heterotic groups, the definition of testers, and genomic prediction. These results showed that a mock genome constructed from the population's intrinsic polymorphisms to perform the SNP calling is an effective alternative for conducting genomic studies of this nature in orphan crops, especially those that do not have a reference genome.
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.