ArticlePloS one2026
Field trial analyses of wheat and cassava benefit from spatial correction.
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
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spatial variation is a major source of error in agricultural field experiments affecting genotype performance prediction. Implementing statistical models that account for spatial effects can improve the prediction of genotype performance. This study evaluated the impact of the P-spline spatial correction method on the estimation of genetic parameters and AIC values in two distinct crops, wheat and cassava, using four models: Block, Block + Spatial, Block + Marker, and Block + Marker + Spatial. Analyses were performed on data from 115 and 68 trials obtained from the T3/WheatCAP and Cassavabase databases, respectively. As assessed using Cullis heritability estimates and AIC values, the results demonstrated that correcting for spatial variation improved analyses of grain yield, test weight, plant height, powdery mildew, stripe rust, and bacterial streak disease in wheat. Similar improvements were observed in cassava for dry matter content, dry yield, and plant height. However, no improvement was observed for cassava mosaic disease or bacterial blight. These results were consistent whether or not marker effects were fitted in the models. This study demonstrates that incorporating spatial correction into statistical analyses substantially improves the precision of variety evaluation. By accounting for field heterogeneity, spatial modeling complements experimental design and enhances the accuracy of treatment comparisons. Therefore, integrating robust experimental designs with appropriate spatial analyses is essential for achieving optimal precision and reliability in field trial evaluations.
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.