ArticleThe plant genome2025
Integration of physiological and remote sensing traits for improved genomic prediction of wheat yield.
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.
- Harnessing artificial intelligence in plant breeding: innovations in digital phenotyping and breeding methodologies.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026Review
- Next-Generation Precision Breeding in Peanut (Insects · 2026Review
- Integration of physiological and remote sensing traits for improved genomic prediction of wheat yield.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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic selection is an extension of marker-assisted selection by leveraging thousands of molecular markers distributed across the genome to capture the maximum possible proportion of the genetic variance underlying complex traits. In this study, genomic prediction models were developed by integrating phenological, physiological, and high-throughput phenotyping traits to predict grain yield in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under three environmental conditions: irrigation, drought stress, and terminal heat stress. Model performance was evaluated using both five-fold cross-validation and leave-one-environment-out (LOEO) schemes. Under five-fold cross-validation, the model incorporating vegetation indices derived from spectral datasets from the grain-filling phase achieved the highest accuracy. In LOEO validation, the model that included days to heading performed best under irrigation, whereas under drought stress, the model utilizing vegetation indices from the vegetative stage showed the highest accuracy. Under terminal heat stress, three models performed best: one incorporating genotype by environment interaction, one using vegetation indices during the vegetative stage, and one integrating spectral reflectance data from both the vegetative and grain-filling phases. Although incorporating multiple covariates can improve prediction accuracy or reduce the normalized root mean square error, using an extended model with all available covariates is not recommended due to the marginal predictive accuracy gains, increases in phenotyping, costs and complexity of data collection analysis. Overall, our findings show the importance of tailored phenomic inputs to specific environmental contexts to optimize genomic prediction of wheat yield.
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.