ArticleThe plant genome2025
Exploiting historical agronomic data to develop genomic prediction strategies for early clonal selection in the Louisiana sugarcane variety development program.
Article in The plant genome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Balancing gain and diversity: Optimal contribution selection for sustainable genetic improvement in sugarcane.The plant genome · 2026Review
- From family trials to genomic mate allocation: statistical and genomic strategies to accelerate sugarcane genetic improvement.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026Review
- Prediction-Based Family Selection in Early Stage Sugarcane Breeding: Comparing BLUP, BLUE, Phenotypic Indices, and Machine Learning.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sugarcane Breeding in the Genomic Era: Integrative Strategies and Emerging Technologies.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Genomic selection: Essence, applications, and prospects.The plant genome · 2025Review
- Exploiting historical agronomic data to develop genomic prediction strategies for early clonal selection in the Louisiana sugarcane variety development program.The plant genome · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic selection can enhance the rate of genetic gain of cane and sucrose yield in sugarcane (Saccharum L.), an important industrial crop worldwide. We assessed the predictive ability (PA) for six traits, such as theoretical recoverable sugar (TRS), number of stalks (NS), stalk weight (SW), cane yield (CY), sugar yield (SY), and fiber content (Fiber) using 20,451 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with 22 statistical models based on the genomic estimated breeding values of 567 genotypes within and across five stages of the Louisiana sugarcane breeding program. TRS and SW with high heritability showed higher PA compared to other traits, while NS had the lowest. Machine learning (ML) methods, such as random forest and support vector machine (SVM), outperformed others in predicting traits with low heritability. ML methods predicted TRS and SY with the highest accuracy in cross-stage predictions, while Bayesian models predicted NS and CY with the highest accuracy. Extended genomic best linear unbiased prediction models accounting for dominance and epistasis effects showed a slight improvement in PA for a few traits. When both NS and TRS, which can be available as early as stage 2, were considered in a multi-trait selection model, the PA for SY in stage 5 could increase up to 0.66 compared to 0.30 with a single-trait model. Marker density assessment suggested 9091 SNPs were sufficient for optimal PA of all traits. The study demonstrated the potential of using historical data to devise genomic prediction strategies for clonal selection early in sugarcane breeding programs.
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.