ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2025
Tests for segregation distortion in tetraploid F1 populations.
Article in TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Tests for segregation distortion in higher ploidy F1 populations.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
key messageIn tetraploid F1 populations, traditional segregation distortion tests often inaccurately flag SNPs due to ignoring polyploid meiosis processes and genotype uncertainty. We develop tests that account for these factors. Genotype data from tetraploid F1 populations are often collected in breeding programs for mapping and genomic selection purposes. A common quality control procedure in these groups is to compare empirical genotype frequencies against those predicted by Mendelian segregation, where SNPs detected to have segregation distortion are discarded. However, current tests for segregation distortion are insufficient in that they do not account for double reduction and preferential pairing, two meiotic processes in polyploids that naturally change gamete frequencies, leading these tests to detect segregation distortion too often. Current tests also do not account for genotype uncertainty, again leading these tests to detect segregation distortion too often. Here, we incorporate double reduction, preferential pairing, and genotype uncertainty in likelihood ratio and Bayesian tests for segregation distortion. Our methods are implemented in a user-friendly R package, menbayes. We demonstrate the superiority of our methods to those currently used in the literature on both simulations 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.