ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2026
Optimizing training sets for genomic selection to identify superior genotypes across multiple environments.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic selection (GS) is a promising strategy in plant breeding for identifying superior genotypes with high true breeding values (TBVs) across multiple environments. However, the relative performance of candidate genotypes often varies due to complex genotype-by-environment (G × E) interactions in multienvironment trials (METs). To address this challenge, we employed a GS prediction model incorporating fixed environment-specific means, random additive genetic effects, and random additive G × E interaction effects to develop training set optimization methods for GS in METs. Two optimization methods derived from the generalized coefficient of determination (CD) criterion-CDmean(v2) (Chen et al. 2024, equivalent to Rincent et al. 2012) and CDmean.MET (Rio et al. 2022)-were evaluated and compared with random sampling. Rather than relying on prediction accuracy-focused correlation metrics, we assessed training set performance using selection-focused ranking metrics, including normalized discounted cumulative gain, Spearman's rank correlation, and rank sum ratio. Because TBVs are latent and unobservable, simulation experiments were conducted using real genotype data from diverse crop datasets, including rice (Oryza sativa L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize (Zea mays L.). Among the evaluated approaches, CDmean(v2) consistently showed high efficiency in identifying top-performing genotypes. In practice, CDmean(v2), implemented using the optimization algorithm provided in the TrainSel package (Akdemir et al. 2021), is recommended for GS-assisted breeding programs, as it produced superior training sets for identifying elite genotypes with reasonable computational cost.
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.