Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41314249›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2026

Genomic prediction in insects: a case study on wing morphology traits in the jewel wasp Nasonia vitripennis.

Shuwen Xia, Gabriella Bukovinszkine Kiss, Hendrik-Jan Megens, Martien A M Groenen, Bas J Zwaan, Piter Bijma, Bart A Pannebakker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Shuwen XiaInstitute of Animal Science, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing 210014, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5284-485X
Gabriella Bukovinszkine KissLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, Wageningen 6708 PB, The Netherlands.
Hendrik-Jan MegensAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, PO Box 338, Wageningen 6700 AH, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3619-7533
Martien A M GroenenAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, PO Box 338, Wageningen 6700 AH, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0484-4545
Bas J ZwaanLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, Wageningen 6708 PB, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8221-4998
Piter BijmaAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, PO Box 338, Wageningen 6700 AH, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9005-9131
Bart A PannebakkerLaboratory of Genetics, Wageningen University & Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, Wageningen 6708 PB, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8503-3896

Funding

European Unions Horizon 2020 researchMarie Sklodowska-Curie 641456
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biological control is a sustainable strategy to combat agricultural pests. Yet, legislation increasingly restricts importing nonnative biocontrol agents. Thus, selective breeding of biocontrol traits is suggested to enhance performance of existing biocontrol agents. Genomic prediction, where genomic data are used to estimate the genetic merit of an individual for specific traits, is an alternative to exploit genetic variation for the improvement of native biocontrol agents. This study aims to establish a proof of principle for genomic prediction in insect biocontrol agents, using wing morphology traits in the model parasitoid Nasonia vitripennis Walker (Pteromalidae). We performed genomic prediction using a genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) model, using 1,230 individuals with 8,639 SNPs generated by genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS). We used individuals from 2 generations from the outbred HVRx population, 717 individuals from generation 169 (G169) and 513 individuals from generation 172 (G172). To assess genomic prediction accuracy, we used across generation validation (forward validation for G172 from G169 and backward validation for G169 from G172) and also 5-fold cross-validation. For size-related traits, including tibia length, wing length, wing width, and second moment area, the accuracy of genomic prediction was close to 0 in both across generation validations but much higher in 5-fold cross-validation (ranging from 0.54 to 0.68). For the shape-related trait wing aspect ratio, a high accuracy was found for all 3 validation strategies, with 0.47 for across generation forward validation (AGFV), 0.65 for across generation backward validation (AGBV), and 0.54 for 5-fold cross-validation. Overall, genomic selection in insect biocontrol agents with a relative small effective population size seems promising. However, factors such as the biology of insects, phenotyping techniques, and large-scale genotyping costs still challenge the application of genomic selection to biocontrol agents.

Indexed as

Genome, InsectGenomicsQuantitative Trait, HeritableWaspsWings, AnimalAnimalsGenotypePhenotypePolymorphism, Single Nucleotideaccuracybiological controlgenomic estimated breeding valuegenomic predictioninsectmorphologytibiawing

Identifiers

PMID41314249
PMCPMC12869063

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.