ArticlePloS one2026
Strategies for implementing genomic selection in a public soybean breeding program.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Improving selection accuracy in soybean breeding programs is crucial for reducing costs and shortening the time required to develop new varieties. Genomic selection (GS) is a promising tool for enhancing the accuracy of selection. This study aimed to identify the most effective GS models for predicting key traits, including seed yield, protein content, oil content, and maturity in soybean breeding programs. Additionally, we sought to determine the optimal training population optimization method (structure vs. size) and establish the minimum number of genotypes required for a training population that ensures high model performance across locations. Finally, we explored multitrait selection based on genomic prediction to improve breeding decisions. Data were obtained from the soybean variety development program and included experiments planted in a randomized block design with two replications at eight locations during the 2023 and 2024 growing seasons. Six GS models were tested: rrBLUP, Bayes A, Bayes B, RKHS, random forest, and support vector machine. Four methods for optimizing the training population were evaluated: random selection (RS), maturity group random selection (MGRS), experimental random selection (ERS), and genetic algorithm (GA). We also assessed ten different training population sizes (ranging from 10% to 90%) and five selection index strategies: direct selection on seed yield, direct selection on oil content, direct selection on protein content, Rank-index, and Smith-Hazel index. Our results suggest that the most effective strategy for implementing GS in a public soybean breeding program involves using the rrBLUP model for genomic prediction. To optimize its performance, it is recommended to train the model using 80% of the total population. This approach provides a robust and reliable prediction. Furthermore, structuring the training population through experimental random selection enhances genetic diversity, which is crucial for improving selection accuracy and robustness across breeding cycles. Finally, the Rank-index proved to be a highly effective strategy for selecting soybean genotypes, particularly for improving seed yield and oil content, while results for seed protein content were less promising. By considering multiple traits simultaneously, this method offers a more balanced approach to genetic improvement compared to single-trait selection methods, making it an excellent tool for breeding programs that aim to enhance both productivity and quality.
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.