ArticleJournal of applied statistics2024
Combining phenotypic and genomic data to improve prediction of binary traits.
Article in Journal of applied statistics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Missing comparability: When genomic selection faces field variability. A case study in soybeans.The plant genome · 2026Article
- Classification-based genomic prediction for early identification of high-yielding and stable soybean genotypes.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Antibiotic susceptibility patterns of clinical isolates of salmonella species producing extended spectrum beta lactamases as predictor of multidrug resistance in a tertiary hospital, Southeastern Nigeria.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- HAP-SAMPLE2: data-based resampling for association studies with admixture.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Integrating and optimizing genomic, weather, and secondary trait data for multiclass classification.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plant breeders want to develop cultivars that outperform existing genotypes. Some characteristics (here 'main traits') of these cultivars are categorical and difficult to measure directly. It is important to predict the main trait of newly developed genotypes accurately. In addition to marker data, breeding programs often have information on secondary traits (or 'phenotypes') that are easy to measure. Our goal is to improve prediction of main traits with interpretable relations by combining the two data types using variable selection techniques. However, the genomic characteristics can overwhelm the set of secondary traits, so a standard technique may fail to select any phenotypic variables. We develop a new statistical technique that ensures appropriate representation from both the secondary traits and the genotypic variables for optimal prediction. When two data types (markers and secondary traits) are available, we achieve improved prediction of a binary trait by two steps that are designed to ensure that a significant intrinsic effect of a phenotype is incorporated in the relation before accounting for extra effects of genotypes. First, we sparsely regress the secondary traits on the markers and replace the secondary traits by their residuals to obtain the effects of phenotypic variables as adjusted by the genotypic variables. Then, we develop a sparse logistic classifier using the markers and residuals so that the adjusted phenotypes may be selected first to avoid being overwhelmed by the genotypic variables due to their numerical advantage. This classifier uses forward selection aided by a penalty term and can be computed effectively by a technique called the one-pass method. It compares favorably with other classifiers on simulated and real data.
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.