Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40914749›Full record

ArticleTAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik2025

Optimising parent selection in plant breeding: comparing metaheuristic algorithms for genotype building.

S Yadav, S Dillon, M McNeil, E Dinglasan, R Mago, P Dodds, L Hickey, B J Hayes

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

S YadavQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. seema.yadav@uq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7191-7770
S DillonCSIRO Agriculture & Food, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
M McNeilCSIRO Agriculture & Food, St Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia.
E DinglasanQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
R MagoCSIRO Agriculture & Food, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
P DoddsCSIRO Agriculture & Food, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
L HickeyQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
B J HayesQueensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

Grains Research and Development Corporation CSP2304-013RTX
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stacking desirable haplotypes across the genome to develop superior genotypes has been implemented in several crop species. A major challenge in Optimal Haplotype Selection is identifying a set of parents that collectively contain all desirable haplotypes, a complex combinatorial problem with countless possibilities. In this study, we evaluated the performance of metaheuristic search algorithms (MSAs)-genetic algorithm (GA), differential evolution (DE), particle swarm optimisation (PSO), and simulated annealing (SA) for optimising parent selection under two genotype building (GB) objectives: Optimal Haplotype Selection (OHS) and Optimal Population Value (OPV). Using a diverse wheat population of 583 lines genotyped for 29,972 SNPs, forming 7645 haplotype blocks and phenotyped for stripe rust scores, we assessed each algorithm's performance across fitness optimisation, convergence speed, and computational efficiency. GA consistently achieved high fitness and rapid convergence, while DE showed robustness but required longer runtime and careful tuning. PSO performed well under the OHS criterion but was less effective for OPV. SA, although computationally lighter, was less consistent in finding optimal solutions. Simulation over 100 breeding cycles showed that OHS outperformed both OPV and GEBV-based selection in long-term genetic gain and diversity retention. OHS maintained heterozygosity and additive variance, which are key for sustainable improvement, while GEBV selection led to early allele fixation. Our findings underscore the potential of GB strategies that prioritise the collective performance of parent sets rather than individual ranking to enhance selection outcomes in genomic-assisted breeding programmes.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsPlant BreedingSelection, GeneticTriticumComputer SimulationGenotypeHaplotypesModels, GeneticPhenotypePolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID40914749
PMCPMC12414015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.