ArticleThe plant genome2025
Environment ensemble models for genomic prediction in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.).
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- OptimGS: a dual integrative genomic prediction framework for improving cold stress tolerance in wheat.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Environment ensemble models for genomic prediction in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.).The plant genome · 2025Article
- Increased genomic predictive ability in mango using GWAS-preselected variants and fixed-effect SNPs.Frontiers in plant science · 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
For important food crops such as the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, L.), global demand continues to outpace the rate of genetic gain for quantitative traits. In this study, we leveraged the multi-environment trial (MET) dataset from the cooperative dry bean nursery (CDBN) to investigate the use of ensemble models for genomic prediction. This set spans 70 locations and 30 years, and accounts for over 150 phenotypes and hundreds of genotypes sequenced for 1.2 million single nucleotide polymorphism markers. We tested three models (linear regression, ridge regression, and neural networks). Each of the three models was implemented using three different approaches: (1) combining all data into one model (singular model), (2) all available single locations were used to train individual submodels comprising one ensemble model (ensemble model), and (3) optimized sets of single locations were used to train individual submodels comprising one ensemble model (optimized ensemble model). The optimized ensemble approach worked best for low-variance locations because the model variance was reduced by averaging across submodels in the ensemble. For models with low prediction accuracy, the ensemble approach can increase accuracy. In certain locations, prediction accuracy was able to overcome narrow-sense heritability, indicating that genomic selection is more efficient than phenotypic selection in these locations. This study indicates that breeding program collaboration can be a way to bypass the bottleneck of low data volume, as pooled data from the CDBN MET produced prediction accuracies of 0.70 for days to flowering, 0.54 for days to maturity, 0.95 for seed weight, and 0.67 for seed yield in individual locations.
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.